Archive for June, 2009
Posted by Larry Doyle on June 23rd, 2009 4:13 PM |
Bernie Madoff
I may stand outside of the mainstream, but I believe Bernie Madoff deserves special treatment when his sentence is handed down on June 29th.
No surprise that Bernie stays true to his cowardice form in begging for mercy from the court, as the Wall Street Journal offers Madoff Seeks Leniency in Sentence:
Bernard Madoff asked a federal judge on Tuesday to sentence him to as little as 12 years in prison after he pleaded guilty earlier this year to operating a massive, decades-long Ponzi scheme.
Talk about chutzpah. Wow!!! Does Bernie think he was involved in a pedestrian white collar financial scam? His lawyer, Ira Sorkin, also provides comic relief in his request:
In a letter filed late Monday and made public Tuesday, Ira Sorkin, a lawyer for Mr. Madoff, asked U.S. District Judge Denny Chin to sentence his client to less than a life sentence.
“Mr. Madoff is currently 71 years old and has an approximate life expectancy of 13 years,” Mr. Sorkin said. “A prison term of 12 years — just short of an effective life sentence — will sufficiently address the goals of deterrence, protecting the public and promoting respect for the law without being ‘greater than necessary’ to achieve them.”
In the alternative, Mr. Sorkin said a sentence of 15 years to 20 years would effectively achieve those goals. “Indeed, such a range will appropriately eliminate concerns for disparate treatment among similarly situated nonviolent offenders,” Mr. Sorkin said.
Is Mr. Sorkin serious? Let’s review his statement: ” . . . eliminate concerns for disparate treatment among similarly situated nonviolent offenders.”
Who has a concern that Bernie will be treated worse? What crimes and criminals bear any resemblance to the Madoff fraud?
Nonviolent offenders? When will our judicial system properly dispense justice for emotional abuse inflicted upon victims in the course of white collar crimes? Why has our judicial process allowed white collar criminals to define their crimes as nonviolent and thus deserving of lessened penalties?
I strongly believe that white collar crimes and criminals are treated far too gently in our judicial sentencing process.
Thus, if I were to sentence Bernie Madoff, I would first want to know how many investors were in his fund. If there were 1000 investors, I would recommend one life sentence per investor, that is, 1000 concurrent life sentences. Why?
I believe each investor is now in an emotional jail cell and likely will be for the remainder of his/her life. Thus, this sentence is the only fair sentence to address that emotional pain and torture.
I do not consider myself a vindictive individual. In fact, I consider myself honest, charitable, and fair. I would welcome hearing the rationale as to how true justice may otherwise be dispensed. That sentence strikes me as fair for all involved.
I have to believe there is a special place in hell for Bernie Madoff.
LD
Tags: Bernie amdoff sentencing on June 29th, Bernie Madoff, Bernie Madoff deserve multiple life sentences, Bernie Madoff sentencing, how long should Madoff serve, Ira Sorkin, Ira Sorkin Madoff lawyer, Madoff asks for 12 years, Madoff begs for mercy, Madoff deserves multiple life sentences, Madoff deserves special treatment, Madoff fraud, Madoff life expectancy, Madoff Seeks Leniency in Sentencing, Madoff sentencing, nonviolent offenders, special place in hell, special place in hell for Bernie Madoff, U.S. District Judge Denny Chin, white collar financial scam
Posted in Bernie Madoff, General | 6 Comments »
Posted by Larry Doyle on June 23rd, 2009 2:25 PM |
Can we all just get along?
As the global economy continues to struggle, tensions within the international trade arena increase. To wit, today the United States and European Union fired a salvo back at a BRIC nation–none other than our largest creditor, the People’s Republic of China. Bloomberg highlights, E.U, U.S. Complain at WTO Over Chinese Export Curbs:
The European Union and the U.S. complained at the World Trade Organization about Chinese export restrictions on raw materials such as magnesium, their third joint complaint against the Asian nation.
The EU and the U.S. said they filed a request for consultations at the WTO in Geneva today, setting off a period of discussions with China aimed at resolving the dispute. If talks fail, WTO judges can be asked to rule on the issue.
“We are most troubled that it appears this is a conscious policy to subsidize Chinese industry,” U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk told journalists in Washington. “China is a leading global producer and exporter of the raw materials in question, and access to these materials is critical for U.S. industrial manufacturers.”
If this complaint were filed in the midst of a strong, robust global economy, one could dismiss it as a ‘one off situation.’ I believe it represents a far more important issue. I view this complaint as another shot in the ongoing ‘serve and volley’ being played out between China and the United States.
To this point, most of the shots have been directed from the BRIC nations toward the United States. While Obama has put forth a few statements to ‘buy American,’ the BRIC nations have aggressively promoted a move away from the U.S. dollar as the international reserve currency.
The crux of the Chinese-U.S. relations continually revolves around a very simple yet complex issue: trust!! (more…)
Tags: buy American, Chinese Export Curbs, Chinese export restrictions on raw materials, Chinese protectionism, Chinese trade disputes, Chinese trade fines, Chinese trade rulings, do Chinese trust U.S., does U.S. trust China, E.U. U.S. Complain Over Chinese Export Curbs, international reserve currency, international trade dispute China U.S. E.U., People's Republic of China trade protectionism, Prisoner's Dilemma, Ron Kirk U.S. trade representative, Shi Yinhong, Shi Yinhong international security professor, tension between BRIC and U.S., tension between China and United States, trust between U.S. and China, World Trade Organization, WTO, WTO to hear U.S. -China trade dispute
Posted in China, General | No Comments »
Posted by Larry Doyle on June 23rd, 2009 11:07 AM |
How would you like to bring a case in which the counterparty is not only defendant, but judge and jury as well? Probably not, right?
Welcome to the world of Wall Street arbitration.
Investors, when opening an account with a bank or broker, are compelled to sign an agreement stating that any dispute will be adjudicated via an arbitration process. On its surface, arbitration is not a bad process. It is utilized in many industries. That said, for arbitration to be uniformly fair the arbitrators must be disinterested parties. Does that happen on Wall Street? Come on, be serious!! The deck is stacked against investors in arbitration. Why?
Arbitrators obviously need to have a thorough knowledge of the financial industry in order to pass judgment. Beyond that, though, Wall Street arbitrators and arbitration have lots of issues and embedded conflicts.
Let’s take a harder look at the arbitration process. The Wall Street Journal provides a brief overview, Securities Arbitration Is Faulted:
Attorneys who represent investors have asked the Securities and Exchange Commission to drop a requirement that a securities-industry representative sit on arbitration panels.
Yes, that statement right there highlights the embedded conflict in the arbitration process. Let me simplify. Say, for example, an investor brings a complaint against his Morgan Stanley broker. On the arbitration board will sit a representative from Goldman Sachs. Simultaneously, right down the hall an investor brings a complaint against his Goldman Sachs broker. On the arbitration board sits a representative from Morgan Stanley. Level playing field? Come on.
Investors who open a brokerage account generally sign away their rights to sue the broker or the firm for bad advice. They have to settle disputes through arbitration run by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, which is funded by the industry.
What do we learn here? The case obviously will not be arbitrated in your lawyer’s office and similarly not in the offices of the broker’s attorney. Who holds court? The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, FINRA, which is funded by Wall Street. Conflict of interest? At least on the surface it would appear as such. For those unfamiliar with FINRA, this is the organization which has yet to issue their 2008 Annual Report and dumped $647 million in Auction Rate Securities either shortly before or as the ARS market was failing. Feeling confident yet? Me neither. (more…)
Tags: are Wall Street arbitrators disinterested, are Wall street arbitrators unbiased, deck stacked against investors, disputes with my broker, how are Wall Street disputes settled, how does Finra fund itself, how does Wall Street arbitration work, investors must sign arbitration agreement, is Wall Street arbitration fair, issues with my broker, problems with my broker, Public Investors Arbitration Bar Association, rules changes proposed by PIABA, Securities Arbitration Is Faulted, SIFMA and PIABA, Wall Street arbitration, Wall Street arbitration process, what is Finra, who is Finra, who sits on Wall street arbitration panels
Posted in General, Wall Street | 1 Comment »
Posted by Larry Doyle on June 23rd, 2009 7:46 AM |
Did Barack Obama and team give a sly and subtle wink to Wall Street that ‘the game goes on’ and the ‘fix is still in?’ I believe they did.
Many analysts, myself included, view Obama’s proposed regulatory reforms as a combination of ‘reshuffling the deck chairs’ and ‘cosmetic surgery.’ In the process of those maneuvers, the rating agencies – Wall Street’s Great Enabler – went largely untouched.
The rating agencies business model presents massive conflicts of interest for all involved. The greatest conflict centers on the fact that the rating agencies’ stream of revenue remains beholden to the Wall Street banks. Without addressing that issue, any dialogue on this topic holds no water.
The Wall Street Journal does yeoman work in highlighting the continuation of the Wall Street charade in this area in writing, A Triple AAA Punt:
If world-class lobbying could win a Stanley Cup, the credit-ratings caucus would be skating a victory lap this week. The Obama plan for financial re-regulation leaves unscathed this favored class of businesses whose fingerprints are all over the credit meltdown.
How is it possible in the midst of such a massive financial meltdown that Obama, Geithner, and team could leave this critically important piece of the regulatory puzzle untouched? Actually, it is quite simple.
As with any heist, the perpetrators need a ‘bag man,’ who will take a payoff while providing cover to the operation. This scenario with the rating agencies is a prime example of How Wall Street Bought Washington.
Obama is flexing his muscles for the public, but without changes within the rating agencies the signal to Wall Street from Washington is that it is ‘business as usual.’ The WSJ offers as much:
The Obama plan does make plenty of vague suggestions, similar to those proposed by the rating agencies themselves, to improve oversight of the ratings process and better manage conflicts of interest. The Obama Treasury has even adopted the favorite public relations strategy of the ratings agency lobby: Blame the victim. “Market discipline broke down as investors relied excessively on credit rating agencies,” says this week’s Treasury reform white paper. After regulators spent decades explicitly demanding that banks and mutual funds hold securities rated by the big rating agencies, regulators now have the nerve to blame investors for paying attention to the ratings.
Sense on Cents believes strongly we need transparency and integrity in the regulatory process. What Obama has delivered in this key area are ‘vague suggestions.’
Am I surprised? No. Once again, the American public at large and investors specifically are subjected to ‘business as usual.’
LD
Tags: A Triple AAA Punt, business as usual on wall street, changes for rating agencies, fix is in on Wall Street, how Wall Street Bought Washington, is Triple AAA rating truly meaningful, no change in ratings process, no real regulatory changes with rating agencies, no regulatory reform of rating agencies, no transparency in Wall Street ratings process, Obama and geithner leave rating agencies alone, Obama offers vague suggestions on rating agency reform, rating agencies business model, rating agencies go untouched by Obama, rating agencies lobby, rating agencies regulatory reform, rating agencies remain unchanged, rating agencies revenue, reform of rating agencies, Wall street owns Washington, Wall Street ratings process unchanged, what does Triple AAA really mean
Posted in General, rating agencies | 4 Comments »
Posted by Larry Doyle on June 22nd, 2009 5:04 PM |
Credit to Nathan Martin, a contributing author at Wall Street Pit, for highlighting this engagement between Dylan Ratigan and Christina Romer, Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers in the Obama administration.
To be perfectly frank, our general media has inured us to softball questions for our political and financial establishment. To that end, financial blogs are carrying the real weight of the day in terms of investigative journalism and critical questioning.
Against that backdrop, Mr. Ratigan’s questioning of Ms. Romer about the lack of transparency and integrity of Wall Street lobbyists’ engagement with Washington is particularly appreciated if only because it happens so infrequently,if at all.
For those interested in this topic, I resubmit:
1. A Real Regulatory Review: Sense on Cents Interview with Bill Singer
2. Future Financial Regulation: Not a Question of Sufficiency, But of Transparency and Integrity
3. How Wall Street Bought Washington
LD
Stay the course . . . we will continue to fight the good fight in airing the issues surrounding this topic!!
LD
Tags: chair of Council of Economic Advisers, Christina romer, Dylan ratigan asks about Wall Street lobbying, Dylan Ratigan interview with Christina Romer, how Wall Street Bought Washington, regulation needs transparency and integrity, transparency of Wall Street lobbying, Wall street lobbying of Washington, Wall street owns Washington
Posted in General | 3 Comments »
Posted by Larry Doyle on June 22nd, 2009 2:31 PM |
When a homeowner goes out without locking his doors and leaving some lights on, he is inviting trouble.
In a similar fashion, the American public should prepare itself for a continued plundering of the portfolios and balance sheets of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae by our leading housing finance gurus, Barack Obama and Barney Frank.
The scene is already set for our dynamic duo to pile an ever increasing amount of risk onto these “wards of the state.” How so?
1. While Freddie and Fannie are very much the responsibility of Uncle Sam, their balance sheets are not technically on Uncle Sam’s roll. That ‘cover’ provides a convenient disguise, but the fact is these ‘foster children’ are now nothing more than receptacles for more of Uncle Sam’s risky undertakings.
2. Neither the media nor the political opposition truly call them on these financial charades.
We learn today that both Barack and Barney have grand visions to add more high risk loans at mispriced rates onto Freddie and Fannie’s books. The Wall Street Journal offers, Changes Urged to Rules on Condo Loans:
Two Democratic lawmakers are calling on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to relax recently tightened standards for mortgages on new condominiums, saying they could threaten the viability of some developments and slow the housing-market recovery.
In March, Fannie Mae said it would no longer guarantee mortgages on condos in buildings where fewer than 70% of the units have been sold, up from 51%. Fannie Mae also won’t purchase mortgages in buildings where 15% of owners are delinquent on condo association dues or where one owner has more than 10% of units, which the firm sees as signals that a building could run into financial trouble. Freddie Mac will implement similar policies next month.
In a letter to the chief executives of Fannie and Freddie, Reps. Barney Frank, the Massachusetts Democrat who is chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, and Anthony Weiner (D., N.Y.) warned that the 70% sales threshold “may be too onerous” and could lead condo buyers to shun new developments. The legislators asked the companies to “make appropriate adjustments” to their underwriting standards for condos.
What does Barney Frank truly know about housing finance? This assessment is an elongated statement similar in style to Frank’s now famous approach to sub-prime lending back in September, 2003. Barney proposed, “I want to roll the dice.” America crapped out on that roll. Now in the height of hypocrisy, Barney is still providing insights and recommendations on mortgage topics. What’s wrong with this picture? (more…)
Tags: are 125% LTV loans eligible for freddie, Barack Obama and Freddie and Fannie, Barack Obama plans on housing, Barney Frank and GSEs, Barney Frank and rolling the dice, Barney Frank housing finance, Barney Frank hypocrite, Barney Frank plans with Freddie/Fannie, Barney Frank wants Freddie and Fannie to change condo rules, condo rules for Freddie and Fannie, fannie Mae's portfolio and balance sheet, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae's downfall and decline, Freddie Mac's portfolio and balance sheet, government uses Freddie and Fannie for more risky mortgages, housing, loans with 125% LTV, losses at Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, Obama refinancing plans, Obama wants to expand refinancing program, Obama wants to increase refinancing program, portfolios of Freddie/Fannie, risky mortgages, what does Barney frank know about mortgages, will freddie and fannie underwrite 125 loans
Posted in Barack Obama, Barney Frank, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, General | 3 Comments »
Posted by Larry Doyle on June 22nd, 2009 11:23 AM |
Are creating jobs the same as saving them?
Please listen closely to the Obama administration on the topic of jobs. Why? Very subtly, Obama and team are defining their employment efforts not only as ‘creating jobs’ but as ‘saving and creating jobs.’ While one may deem this broader definition as a worthy and admirable approach, it is pure politics.
Please tell me what prior administration would have addressed employment in this manner? I mean, taking a counter approach, who would accept a politician as credible if they pronounced, “well, we are looking to create millions in new jobs but we are really not concerned with saving jobs.” The American public is being fed pure political pandering and the media will not call Obama on it.
Why has Obama “lowered the bar” on the jobs front? In typical management fashion, Obama is playing the “undersell to overdeliver” game. Why does he feel compelled to “play this game?” Pure politics on one hand, but Obama appreciates real economic peril on the other. What does that peril encompass? The fact that the Brave New World of the Uncle Sam Economy is not going to have meaningful job creation anytime soon.
We see evidence of that this morning. The Wall Street Journal puts forth, Cuts Are Here to Stay, Companies Say:
Many companies that have cut jobs, pay and benefits during the recession may not be quick to restore them.
The Washington Post similarly addresses this topic in writing, Recovery’s Missing Ingredient: New Jobs:
The likelihood of severe unemployment extending into the 2010 midterm elections and beyond poses a significant political hurdle to President Obama and congressional Democrats, who are already under fire for what critics label profligate spending. Continuing high unemployment rates would undercut the fundamental argument behind much of that spending: the promise that it will create new jobs and improve the prospects of working Americans, which Obama has called the ultimate measure of a healthy economy.
Without real stability and improvement on the employment front, our economy will not see meaningful improvement in retail sales and inventory buildup.
Do not be surprised to see renewed talk out of Washington of the need for another Stimulus Package despite the fact that the first one has currently had little to no impact.
Obama and the Democrats are running into a wall of public fatigue in regard to the exploding fiscal deficit. Public opinion polls show the deficit is viewed as much more pressing than Obama’s health-care reform.
Has Barack bitten off more than he can chew? While the media does not keep him honest, the public at large is not totally clueless.
A penny saved may in fact be a penny earned, but in regard to jobs that principle does nothing for our nation’s unemployed.
LD
Tags: creating jobs, deficit more important than health care reform, economic peril without jobs, economy declining, employment retail sales inventory buildup, health care reform less important than deficit, Job Cuts Are Here to Stay, jobs outlook, markets decline along with employment, media on creating and saving jobs, need for new Stimulus Package, no jobs no retail sales, no stability on employment, Obam on employment, Obama creating and saving jobs, Obama focuses on saving jobs, Obama lowers the jobs bar, Obama plays jobs game, Obama redefines employment success, outlook on jobs, penny saved is a penny earned, public fatigue on deficit, recover's Missing Ingredient New Jobs, retail sales won't improve given lack of job growth, saving jobs, saving jobs vs creating them, Unemployment, what about employment, when will employment improve, when will employment situation improve, when will jobs situation improve, will unemployment get worse, will unemployment increase more, will we need new Stimulus Bill
Posted in Employment, General | No Comments »
Posted by Larry Doyle on June 22nd, 2009 7:24 AM |
Can an individual investor get a fair shake on Wall Street?
Many smaller investors believe Wall Street is biased against them. Why? Information is hoarded by major institutions who act upon it prior to it disseminating to individuals. With the development of the internet, information is processed and distributed much more quickly. How do institutional investors stay ahead of individual investors? Utilizing ETFs and financial futures.
How can individual investors try to keep pace with institutions? Track the activity of institutional insiders, that is, the senior executives within publicly traded corporations. An insider may have reason to buy or sell the company stock that goes well beyond company prospects. Often an insider will sell company stock strictly for tax purposes. However, when insider activity, either buying or selling, moves dramatically in one direction or another, every investor should pay attention. On that note, please pull in your chairs and pay particular note, as Bloomberg highlights Insiders Exit Shares at Fastest Pace in Two Years:
Executives at U.S. companies are taking advantage of the biggest stock-market rally in 71 years to sell their shares at the fastest pace since credit markets started to seize up two years ago.
Sales by CEOs, directors and senior officers have accelerated to the highest level since June 2007, two months before credit markets froze, as the S&P 500 rebounded from its 12-year low in March. The increase is making investors more skittish because executives presumably have the best information about their companies’ prospects.
In typical fashion, analysts assess this insider activity as nothing more than an attempt to lock in the returns of the recent equity rally. I seriously discount that. I view major moves in insider activity as a signal of strong, macroeconomic outlook. If the insider activity was more trading related, then the insiders would not actually sell the company stock but would more likely hedge it via purchasing put options.
What do all these insiders see on our economic horizon which is leading them to sell on such a massive scale? Well, the World Bank sees dark clouds out there. Bloomberg reports, World Bank Cuts Forecast for Global Growth to 2.9%:
The World Bank said the global recession this year will be deeper than it predicted in March and warned that a flight of capital from developing nations will swell the ranks of the poor and the unemployed.
The world economy will contract 2.9 percent, compared with a previous forecast of a 1.7 percent decline, the Washington- based lender said in a report today. Growth will be 2 percent next year, down from a 2.3 percent prediction, the bank said.
This outlook on the global economy does contrast with a more sanguine view provided by the IMF. While economic forecasts from different organizations and analysts will often vary, there is nothing vague about massive insider activity, and right now they are headed for the exits.
LD
Tags: are insiders buying or selling, has insider selling increased, how do small investors compete with institutions, insider activity, insider selling, insider selling highest since June 2007, insider selling is increasing, insider selling soars, insiders headed for the exits, insiders negative on market, institutions move quickly via ETFs, investors should track insiders, what are insiders doing, what drives insider activity, why are insiders selling, World Bank economic outlook, World Bank sees economy slowing, World Bank sees growth contracting, World Bank sees growth declining, World Bank sees slower economy, World Bank view
Posted in Economy, General, insider activity | 6 Comments »
Posted by Larry Doyle on June 21st, 2009 9:47 AM |
Happy Father’s Day!!
Is Barack Obama anything more than a federal version of the dreaded “helicopter parent?” I’m serious.
We have all witnessed overbearing and overprotective parents hovering over their offspring from youth soccer through middle school teasing and all the way into the workplace. In my opinion, our nation now suffers from generations nurtured without true hardship or failure.
We are now paying the price.
What truly drives and motivates many to succeed? (Please understand that I do not define success as purely monetary.) However one defines success, there is little doubt the greatest motivation is always the fear of failure. That fear does not abate as one attains ever higher levels of achievement. Why? The intangible quality, the fear of failure, is embedded in the character of an individual from a very early age.
How does one “develop” that intangible quality? Take risks and fail. Obviously, I am not encouraging taking imprudent risks that would place one in a position of excessive physical, mental, emotional, or monetary harm. However, I strongly encourage individuals from an early age to move outside their comfort zone in order to experience the discomfort associated with the fear of failing. In so doing, the foundation for success will be poured and then cemented.
Against this backdrop, I have mixed feelings about the launching of the new Consumer Protection Finance Agency. Why? I appreciate helping people gain a greater understanding of financial principles and products. At the same time, however, I fear many consumers may view this agency as a “safety net” that will preclude or prevent ill-conceived or inappropriate products from coming to market in the first place. Why may they think that?
A consumer who witnesses violations of moral hazards at almost every level will come to expect the same for them at the personal level. Many consumers are already experiencing these situations to a degree via the non-economic refinancing of their mortgages through the Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae ‘piggy bank.’
Please do not confuse my writing with a lack of willingness to help and assist people. In fact, I sincerely hope Sense on ¢ents plays an ever increasing role in promoting financial literacy. However, the greatest help and assistance starts at home and in the classroom.
Obama should be pounding and overemphasizing principles of strong family units along with the necessity for educational advancement. I give Obama credit for his timely message, “We Need Fathers to Step Up,” but we need this message not only on Father’s Day but 365 days a year. I know that education is a major initiative within the Obama administration, but I do not hear or see an airing of the cold, brutal facts primarily within our urban education systems (i.e. a 50% high school dropout rate in major urban settings).
In summary, I believe our nation suffers financially and morally from a system promoting an overprotective sense of entitlement when what we truly need is a reemergence of the fear of failure that stemmed from The Great Depression.
I hope that readers do not view my writing as cold, but rather more in the spirit of a parent who wants to see every individual and community achieve true and lasting success.
Happy Father’s Day to all the Dads in the world who are “allowing” their children to fail.
LD
Tags: allow kids to fail, allow people to fail, failure leads to success, fear of failure drives success, financial and moreal failures in our country, financial illiteracy, foundation for success is laid in failure, gaining greater financial literacy, greatest motivation to succeed is fear of failure, greatest regulation is fear of failure, helicopter parents, how to develop financial literacy, launch of Consumer Protection Finance, launch of Consumer Protection Finance Agency, long term success comes from short term failure, move outside comfort zone, need for financial literacy, non-economic refinancing via Freddie and Fannie, nothing succeeds like success, Obama does not allow or promote fear of failure, Obama is a federal helicopter parent, overprotective parents, push kids outside comfort zone, responsibilities of fathers, sense of entitlement, success stems from failure, urban education results, violation of moral hazards, We Need Fathers to Step Up, will Consumer Protection Finance Agency truly protect consumers
Posted in General | No Comments »
Posted by Larry Doyle on June 20th, 2009 6:23 PM |
UPDATE: The show has concluded, but you can listen to a recording in its entirety by clicking the Play button on the audio player below. Once the playback has started, you can fast forward or rewind to any portion of the show by clicking at any point along the play bar.
Please join me Sunday evening from 8-9 p.m. ET for NoQuarter Radio’s Sense on Cents with Larry Doyle. While the equity markets retracted somewhat this week, bonds, commodities, and currencies remain well within recent ranges. Away from the markets, the Obama administration proposed a widespread revamping of financial regulations. I look forward to navigating these topics.
The most important topic of all remains the health of our economy. I am extremely pleased to have as my guest an individual who is uniquely well positioned to comment on our economy from a wide perspective. Rob Tortorella is the President and Founder of Corrosion Products and Equipment in Rochester, NY. Rob founded his industrial engineering and supplies company in the late 1980s and has grown it organically and via acquisition into a multi-million dollar enterprise. Corrosion operates throughout the Northeast and also has significant Caribbean based operations. I am not embellishing in stating that Rob and Corrosion truly define the American dream!!
Rob’s business and personal relationships marvel at his vision, integrity, and unbridled enthusiasm. Please join me for my interview with Rob Tortorella, an individual filled with unparalleled perspective and inspiration. I am honored to have him join me this Sunday evening.
These are truly historic times in the global economy. Let’s “navigate the economic landscape” without the pandering or nonsense found elsewhere! What is on your mind? What would you like to address? Please share your questions and thoughts by calling in to (347) 677-0792, and also join our live chat room, which I’ll start up about 10 minutes before the show begins. Many thanks to Larry Johnson and the rest of the team at NoQuarterUSA blog for providing such a vibrant vehicle as NoQuarter Radio. I look forward to having you join me Sunday evening as we collectively navigate the economic landscape!!
LD
Tags: Corrosion Products and Equipment, Larry Doyle interview with Rob Tortorella, Rob Tortorella, Rob Tortorella interview on Sense on Cents, Rob Tortorella talks about the economy, success of Rob Tortorella
Posted in General | No Comments »
RSS Feed
Twitter
Facebook
Email
Home
