This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Citadel - E-Trade Update: OTS Suspends Application While It Examines "Certain Issues"
In a surprising turn of events the OTS, highlighted earlier as the decision maker on the Citadel/E-Trade transaction has decided to slow down the process. William Ruberry disclosed in a conversation to Matt Goldstein that the OTS has decided to "suspend consideration of the application while we examine certain issues." Furthermore, Ruberry added that a confidential "policy and law'' letter about the decision to suspend the application had been sent to the parties.
Is the potential abuse of the market landscape by various predatory institutions finally being taken seriously by the regulators. One can only hope.
- 5041 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -


certain issues such as... insolvency?
Like what dummy? ETFC is better prepared and can actually handle the mark to market on their books, unlike 95% of the banks out there.
This is finally some light getting shined on Citadel's talons in the order flow.
Does everything need to be spelled out. Shady shit has been going down for a long time with that deal. Would love to see Griffin get fucked for what they have been doing with that stock since '07. And now he's a fiduciary.
fuck him.
If you watched very carefully from the get-go in October 2007 right up there in the trades, they were angling to bleed the cash-flow out of E-Trade with huge preferred interest and move up the two senior debt structures/issues senior to them and in front of them, then capture the platform to shoot the retail fish in the barrel...but that's just my fantasy. I know I don't know.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/18600361/CyclesPatternProjections809 newest essay from Martin Armstrong
CB -
You do good commentary - what is your take on the Armstrong piece? I scanned it, but the physics/markets thing is not my strong suite. Anyone who can riff on Schacht and monetary policy like you can probably tear this apart better than me.
Thoughts?
hey Anon, thank you for the compliments
I like Martin Armstrong and his approach to markets, economy, and history. I like the fact that he is not indoctrinated in the dogma of linear progression of either time, human psychology or reactions that are expressed by human actions. He did some wonderful pieces of analytical thought in his essay " How all systems can collapse over night " ( you can find it on Scribd as well ). Basically the paradigm of his work is that some fundamentals of human nature never change ( ie; human psychology and reactionary patterns ) and that they can be used to analyze current trends by observing past events and projecting them onto what is happening. As I'm aware, Armstrong did some serious work with Princeton and he was a lead advisor to some foreign central banks during his professional carrier. Also, what i like about his work is the clear picture he paints with his methodological approach, combining chaos and well-ordered anthropological rules. I really advise you to search for his essays on Scribd and DL them; he offers brilliant conclusions, backed by evidence from history, about our current situation. You will find interesting that the paradigm of ALL his work is the fact that what we call " progress " is historically defined as anomaly and is exponential, but the reaction to the micro-events which occur during that period of progression are predictable and repetitive. But, i don't want to go to deep with this, so I, again, suggest you DL his essays and read them. Excellent work.
EDIT: doh; forgot the most important thing; you will better understand Armstrong if you know something about Quantum mechanics; basically what Armostrong is saying for all this years is that like in Quantum mechanics, everything is probable in the boundaries of the system, and he acknowledges the micro-chaos of short-time periods, but strongly believes in the cyclical order when time and events are observed in a longer period. Just like in quantum mechanics, you cant describe the patterns of micro-chaos but can calculate the behavior of the atom and its function. Something like quantum economics, but Armstrong does it with much more sophistication and accuracy than the people who actually do work regarding quantum economics.
"I know of scarcely anything so apt to impress the imagination as the wonderful form of cosmic order expressed by the ‘Law of Frequency of Error’. The law would have been personified by the Greeks and deified, if they had known of it. It reigns with serenity and in complete self-effacement, amidst the wildest confusion. The huger the mob, and the greater the apparent anarchy, the more perfect is its sway."
- Francis Galton, 1889
Awesome, CB. Thank you and for the most part, Armstrong too, though I've yet to reconcile his behind-bars thing. We've got more than enough brilliant assholes today. Back to Franklin's (and Smith's) unrelenting on focus on morals is where we should be, wish I could say I had any basis for understanding Armstrong's past in this light. I keep wanting to think "Frank Abagnale" when I read his stuff, maybe we should be so lucky.
And totally agree Anon 37406, fuck Citadel and Griffin. Yet another wonder boy fleecing infantile (stupid) investors by professing to predict an unknowable future going down the tubes. Dime a dozen:
http://www.nypost.com/seven/07082009/business/fallen_angel_in_fix_178127.htm
Thank you Alex
I have been busting my head for almost two years now writing about the problems of financial mathematics and the paradigm on which is functions. Also, i have been building some mathematical models of non-Newtonian Universe, and non-quantum Universe to show all the fallacies of financial mathematics; but primarily that financial mathematics is by its definition a derivation of applied mathematics ( must be defined by either the rules of a Newtonian Universe or a quantum one ), but shows vast tendencies to behave like pure mathematics ( independent from both Newtonian and/or Quantum Universe( in another words behaviorally independent )). I hope i finish this study in couple of months and i will then forward it to ZH, so maybe Tyler puts it up for all of you to see the lunacy of the current system and the dichotomic rules on which it operates.
I'm not worthy! Will try to keep up, and hope off-the-chart brilliant minds like yours resist the dark side. ;) As a social structure, Dee Hock accurately indentified our Newtonian/Cartesian downfall that spawned our clueless command and control, central planning, industrial age modern-day escapade. I trust we're on the way to more natural and respectful "chaordic" ways:
http://www.enlightennext.org/magazine/j22/hock.asp?page=1
I am looking forward it it CB.
Anyone who understands the BOP can have a better understanding of Martin Armstrong.
thank you guys
yes, the problem lies in the paradigm of rationalism which has transformed the view on society from self-evolving to necessary planed in order to evolve. That had political consequences which started shortly after Hegel and Kant made a breakthrough in political thought. it started with the unification of Germany in 1861 and concentration of power in a political structure and exploded with totalitarian regimes in the 20th century. What we are experiencing know is the process of concentrated democracy and ideological concentration trough ge-political and economical mergers. You can conclude that by observing these trends trough forming of the EU, NAFTA and other political organizations which goal is to concentrate planning and execution trough various distributive models. Even monetary consolidation of the EU countries represents a dangerous trend. And all that is based on the prevalent paradigm that rationalism is the most suitable epistemological, sociological and methodological approach to eradicate chaotic movements which could harm future progress. Politically that is verifiable trough all the new legislatures which were imposed on various social sectors to consolidate the differences and to ease the correspondence between entities, alos in order to suppress chaotic movements. One of my great teachers was Feyerabend and i always cite him and his view when i approach the topic of well-ordered chaos and its beneficiary effect on all structures.
You're not going to kill Schrödinger's cat, are you? I wouldn't like that.
its already dead, i just cant keep the poor thing from asking me food.
I read the Armstrong piece. I will agree with him so far as to say that mathematically, randomness is not unlimited in the universe. To imagine that trends can be seen in otherwise "random" human systems is not unusual at all, however, given our willingness to record history and the length of human lifetimes. For example, old men are experts at predicting the behaviour of young men. If he wants to call these trends "waves" I really don't mind.
His discussion of multiple universes add nothing to the subject and strikes me as embellishment.
The act of trying to draw a parallel between a) our ability to perceive subatomic particles only at certain times and b) our ability to perceive economic shifts is silly. It is NOT the same thing as saying that the society can only perceive these shifts at certain times and that therefore we can apply quantum wave theory to understand societal economics. He uses terms like "event horizon" in a meaningless manner.
Next I expect him to write a paper describing how observing economic systems changes them; ACK! Regulators!
yes, but in quantum physics observing equals to measurement; not seeing something. google Heisenberg or quantum mechanics to know more. I'm tired as shit and on my way to get my one hour sleep, and have no brain to elaborate further at this moment. GN SW
This is where Heisenberg comes in. We can predict statistically that a given percentage of a group will react, but we cannot predict which individuals within the group will do so.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
He doesn't seem to have a firm grasp on the the concept of Heisenbergs uncertainty principle. It has nothing to do with statistics but with the limits of accuracy on an observation of certain (related) properties of an observed quantity.
He is also using the term event horizon - which btw is not a phenomenon of quantum mechanics but of relativity - in a very loose way.
The GUT does not attempt to unify classical and quantum theory, but gravitation and quantum physics. In addit?on there is no such thing as the GUT, this is an umbrella term for a host of string theories (none of which produces measurable predictions) and loop quantum gravity.
In other words, this is by no means proven. It's just theories.
His paper is interesting but highly speculative and sometimes lacks scientific rigour.
Alex, if I'm not mistaken, Armstrong claims that he has been framed. He goes on to claim reason for his framing is that he has developed a literall formula that can accurately predict market, but refuses to hand it over to the government, see the movie PI. I know nothing of the specifics of the case, I just know that I came across reading about it on lunch break back in 2006, and subsequently spent the rest of the day writing a code that produced a wave structure similar to the one he described. Unfortunately I was at work, and was not allowed to take any files home... I'm wishing now I would have broken the rules just once, since it was, after all, MY equation, albeit, built from Armstrongs description. mehhhh c'est la vie.
At one time I was enamored by Marty and his secret code. For anyone with an Excel spreadsheet, you can generate the cycle points just by adding whatever number of days for each cycle. To test this idea, put in his dates of cycle bottoms and tops and count the number of days.
My father would go on and on about Marty. How Marty is so smart, how people are out to get him, and whatever. The guy sounded like some kind of misunderstood savant if you were to listen to my father. Martin Arstrong is just like Madoff and all the other scammers out there.
I am sorry if I am stepping on anyone's feelings. I admire scammers for how truly ruthless they can be, and how people will stick up for them.
You don't hurt my feelings, but we know Madoff was a scammer because he admitted to it, what we don't know, yet, because he won't tell us, is who helped him. What evidence do you present that Marty is a scammer, other than your word?
Cheeky, thanks for posting this!!! Fascinating stuff. These are ideas I've been toying around with myself, that is, the fractal nature of the universe, and my place within that recursive feedback loop. I have also been reading Elliot Wave Theory, and it would seem it is on par with Armstrongs' direction, the socio-psychological expression of the herd mentality in the frame work of price, pattern and time. Quarks are to the tick, as humans are to the daily candlesticks (whoa, and it rhymes..). You could surmise that the weekly chart is our immediate social structure, the monthly our extended community, etc. In this respect it's easy to see why the govt is so willing to bankrupt us to keep us happy, after all it's become the new American way, if things aren't going well, just take some Xanax, and everything will be hunky dory, of course we know what happens when that doesn't work out so well.
Reading Armstrongs' piece I was instantly reminded of the Powers of 10 video created in the 60's, I think, maybe the early 70's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2cmlhfdxuY
For an updated version check out Cosmic Voyage, originally for IMAX, and do yourself a favor click HD, and watch in full-screen.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxXf7AJZ73A
I was especially interested in the fact that, viewed from the outer reaches of the known Universe, the pieces separated by thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of light years begin to coalesce into something that resembles the neural networks of a brain...
But back to the market, quantum physics, and the cyclical nature of the quasi-multi-universe. I especially keyed in on the phrase
"What the government hates the most, is that they cannot alter cyclical turning points"
I have made the analogy in the past, to the current/former administrations handling of the cancerous environment that the economy has now found itself in, has been a bit like the Ludovico Technique ala A Clockwork Orange. This fits well with Armstrongs' depiction of the government "pissing in the wind", as I'm sure anyone who has seen the film knows how well the rehabilitation worked out in the end.
I find the time lines he projects to be rather interesting as well, and would be interested to know what degree of error he allots to the cyclical waves. Come 2010 we will be entering into the first blurred edges of the galactic equator. If Hawkings' theories are correct, the influences of the Hawking Radiation emanating from the super massive spinning black hole at the center of the galaxy will be at their apex in 2012, also when Armstrong predicts the ultimate bottom is put in, of course we have all heard about the Mayan prophecy, and if you haven't, well, nuff said. But, there is also Solar Maximus that is supposed to be reaching it's zenith in 2012. And of course we have CERN and FERMIlab furiously trying to find a graviton, aka Gravity Wave, whatever the outcome may be of said discovery. Not to mention the inevitable conclusion of all major market down turns, war.
It seems to me that as a society, as a nation, and as a planet, we are heading into a confluence of resistance lines that will far outweigh any stimulus package concieved of, just were exactly does the gov't/fed intend to put their stops and or limits? I'm just glad to know there are people out there share this concern, so again, thanks for the post.
Cheers,
=]
Try growing some flowers or vegetables to get a grip on Spinoza's God.
you can get a grip on Spinoza's God from doing any two or more, seemingly unrelated things, like i don't know; being a general and talking on the telephone; in Spinoza's universe those are the same things; modern science ( most notably physics ), philosophy ( metaphysics) and mathematics ( only pure ) are more of a Faust who put Spinoza as his king and guide.
Begining a garden is certainly on my todo list, but it has nothing to do with Spinoza nor his god.
Your dogma to your God's ear, but I will say with certainty that only nothing is nothing.
I loved the Eames's movie, thanks!
actually nothing is a empty set or an empty matrix with infinite probability outcomes ( sorry, all crazed up on quantum mechanics; read about Banach-Tarski theorem to get the idea ) here's the link about BT Theorem ( it more of a differential geometry/probability theory, but will do as an argument in this case ) http://www.scribd.com/doc/18534124/banachtarski
Brilliant post D.O.D. Yes you are absolutely correct. The main problem of modern society and its " particles " lays in the fact that general accepted metaphysical explanation ( but also a purely dogmatic one ) is the one that says that society is epistemologically static and that all knowledge and action that can be derived must come from the system which is defined as above. No variations outside the ( dogmatically structured ) systems are allowed ( but they are necessary, but not allowed, that would crush the prevalent dogma ) and that is what is crushing the dominant form of society. Not only does the prevalent weak belief constantly finds itself in fighting new anti-thesis, it puts exponentially increased effort to do so ( evidence 1. THE BAILOUT, THE TAXATION; CAP N TRADE etc ). This will ultimately lead to two possible outcomes. Discrete acceptance of a new antithesis as a paradigm or a destructionist shift in acceptance of that new paradigm. The problem that the one in power to be have is not of a political nature, or sociological; it is a philosophical one. And until the full conscience and knowledge about the constant cyclical change is accepted we will titter on a verge of conflicted ideas; and remember this is a zero sum game. Fukuyama made that mistake when he said in 1992 that the history has come to an end ( which is in the domain of speculative metaphysics, not epistemology or sociology) because the western system based on the idea of liberal democracy and liberal capitalism being the final antithesis of Communism and totalitarianism ( even though there was no such ideological base in " communist " countries since Stalin died), and so did Hegel when he wrote in his Phenomenology that German Empire is the end ( final affirmation ) of the historical tendencies to achieve Freedom. The same mistake is being made today in the Western World.
The most striking similarity I've EVER encountered between phsyics and sociology is called a bose-enstein condensate. It's when sub atomoic particles condense and it reforms the way they are connected. You get the exact same thing in sociology with money. Every culture every society always has the same relative amount of super rich people who control the same ratio of money. But that is covered under a sociological node theory that had been adapted to a business model that explained competition in online games or even competition in business sectors always followed a ratio where the "fittest" node would capture the same relative ratio of market share.
+5
http://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/banklist.html
Its at only one for the day. Thats like tellin a californian "whoa, did you feel that 4.5 earthquate?"
who cares.
The last year has given me serious doubts about my country. My pride is replaced with shame and a fair amount of fear. And I was even an Obama supporter....Bernanke is the umpire behind the plate. His message was being spread and gaining even more support...therefore he needed to be censored. Until we have guys like Black back as regulators nothing will change. We just
good articles; good articles 4 slow news day ..http://www..
hat tip: finance news & finance opinions
Thanks CB
Another Good book on the subject of Time Pattern Analysis is
http://www.amazon.com/Fractal-Time-Secret-2012-World/dp/1848500750
TD, are you sure you aren't front-running the news wires, because your High Frequency Posting is light years ahead of the rest of the financial news dinosaurs.
That is because the financial media does not do "news".
ahh, free will again. funny how some will jump off an ivory tower or two just to rail against the fallacy of believing in such drivel. everyone knows that choice is an illusion, baked into the cake of socialized private risk. ill have another helping of derivatives please.
Dear CB, you are clearly one of the most knowlegble people that posts on ZH and I think your contributions are greatly appreciated by most readers and most definitely by me! I am an avid reader of Mr. Armstrong as well, as very rarely you get University levels education for free :-). In one of your previous posts you said " the problem lies in the paradigm of rationalism which has transformed the view on society from self-evolving to necessary planed in order to evolve..." You have also placed a starting date to this process as the unification of Germany 1861. On this point I like to point out that similar processes have been in place well before that. The Roman Empire is a prime example of the paradigm of rationalism as they imposed currency and education to every new province they had conquered. Thus imposing rationalization seems to be a necessary step to evolve a growing structure. It could also be argued that the British Empire was another earlier example. My opinion is that a degree of rationalism has always been present if you look at any "entity" that is controlling or trying to control a large number of individuals. What we seeing our days is no different to what we can observe in history, bar the speed at which certain aspect of this rationalization is implemented. Although it could be argued that the increased speed lies more on the velocity of the message reaching the individuals rather than on the actual implementation of decisions. Best regards
thank you Rari Nantes
i have given some thought about classifying Roman Empire as a proto-rationalistic example, but then i have realized that, although there was some central planning involved, that there was also the question of provinces and that those were mostly governed by independent Pontii and that forced me to name consolidation of German states as the first real example of rationalistically ordered state. It is also true that there is almost a 1000 yrs gap in which dogmatically ordered paradigm prevailed ( non-secular structuralization of state ). New examples of rationally determined state can be found in some political forces during the time of Genghis Khan, primarily in the fact the the new ruler needed to be " elected " or " enthroned " in Mongolia and not on the territory where the potential successor was located. Reading historical notes that is also one of the major reasons the Mongols were stopped in their further expansion into West. When Genghis Khan died during expansion Ogedei Khan was already determined to be his successor, but to be enthroned he had to go back to Mongolia and go trough necessary procedure. After that the area which was captured by Mongols was rapidly shrinking due to the lack of command on the battlefield. This is just one of the, more trivial, examples when rationality becomes more of a dogmatic ideology than a valid argument/contra-argument. Also, thank you for point out the new methods used to spread the message across the board. Technology had and is having a major impact on peoples decision to have a dogmatically rational paradigm of the state for two reasons; its mere existence and effects provide evidence that the current system is advanced and beneficiary ( we could seriously argue that, but i don't have enough space here to do so ) and it also serves as a medium of high functional velocity. Thank you for your answer and for pointing out some things i have clearly overlooked. Sincerely CB.
I take solace by applying quantum thinking to conclude that somewhere along the probabilistic wave function there is a reality where the truths we hold to be most dear aren't lies told by liars.