Thoughts?

>yfw you realize that working in investment banks like JPM almost guarantees you a job in private equity or the government both of which have higher earning potentials than some garage-band hedge fund
>yfw you just want the little guy to win but this is the real world and that doesn't happen

It would have been a much more accurate movie if it had looked at all three sides of the issue instead of just focusing on the side liberals hate the most, focusing on the second side in passing, and completely ignoring the third side:

>1: Wall Street and the banks were greedy handing out the mortgages like candy and were also lying about their volatility
You saw the movie, you know all about this

>2: people who had no business getting mortgages and homes got them anyways
The movie showed the one dumb stripper who had five mortgages (for her her five homes, if I remember correctly?), and yes it's the banks fault for loaning her so much money, but it was also her fault for being dumb enough to borrow all of that money in the first place. Also the movie did focus briefly on those two real estate brokers who were dumb enough to give mortgages to anyone, but at the same time, the people taking out those mortgages should also be blamed for living above their means, which the movie didn't focus on and even defended poor people (and immigrants for some reason, not really relevant at all) even though it was very much their fault too

>3: the immense amount of pressure the government puts on the banks to give questionable people mortgages
The movie completely ignored this angle even though it's a huge reason why banks gave out so many garbage mortgages (and still do today). Yes the banks made shitloads of money on these shitty mortgages too, and that's why they didn't complain when the government made them do this, but the movie shouldn't have ignored the fact that the government wants poor people in homes they own for a variety of reasons even though they probably shouldn't

I actually thought that worked reasonably well.

Margo Robbie naked in a bathtub is a superb way to get plebs to understand basic financial concepts.

Or dudes anyway. But what girls went to see this.

> I just invested 2666 USD into Twitter Stock market, what does Veeky Forums thinks about this

Misery , buy TSLA

You said what I was going to say better than I could have said it. Still a tremendously enjoyable film.

nah even for girls. they'd kill to be at her place, and getting financial """advice""" is therefore appreciated

>be you
>young cuck from 2nd tier colleges with stem background
>obviosuly not prestigious enough to make ibd at bulge bracket so settle for trading
>job literally entails getting coffees and calculating p&l everyday
>only have a paper trading account but muh experience
>08 hits, prop trading at bulge bracket castrated, first one gets cut
>apply to private equity jobs with zero transferable skills and knowledge
>get hung up within a minute during phone screens
>yfw

also
>taking the author's exaggerated narrative seriously
>thinking 30mm own stake is garage hedge fund tier
>not knowing most ppl worked in high finance retired with way less

Your imaginary scenario would make sense if I wasn't taking classes at Yale and if my major wasn't Finance and French. I've also already had two internships over the past two summers and have two offers on the table for post-undergrad. Keep coping.

Also who would work for a bank (or any financial institution for that matter) that doesn't have the foresight to see something like the subprime mortgage crisis coming? Goldman made money from it, BoA made money from it, Citi made money from it, why would you want to work for a bank/firm that can't make money in a down market? Your imaginary situation is an odd one mate.

I can't wrap my head around '07 adjustable rates? What happened, how did rates get adjusted?

Did the Fed raise the interest rates or what? Why did the majority fail to pay up in '07?

I hated how they were constantly refereed
to as a garage band hedge fund considering they started with 100k and turned it into 30m and its their own money. Like the way the wall street editor asked if he still lived at home.

Congrats but you probably still will never reach 30m.

People got in with teaser rates. Adjusted way higher after short time. Many assumed they would sell at best or refi at worst.

>not knowing ivy league schools don't offer finance major for undergrad
how btfo are you rn?

Nobody is going to care bro. Why the fuck would you take french?

That was a good movie.

>BoA made money from it, Citi made money from it

Get a load of this guy.

In 2009 BofA and Citi almost collapsed again.

Probably so he has the option to work in Switzerland

I disagree. I thought all 3 were covered well enough.

They could have added Tyrone using a HEL to buy huge rims for an escalade I suppose, but then LAPD kills him while helping the bank repossess his mom's house so it's net. Okay cut out IMO.

a pretty nice flick and entertaining but shallow focus will always be shit and the cinematography was distracting

>mfw I'm in JPM CIB
>mfw I went to a shit tier state school and got mediocre grades
>mfw I got here without connections
>mfw in the one who wrote originally but now it's copypasta for the weekly Veeky Forums thread on this stupid movie

You're wrong, it hardly covered the actual borrowers and government aspect of the crisis, the government was not blamed at all, not even once, and the stripper was portrayed as being "deceived" by the mortgage lenders instead of realizing having 5 mortgages on a stripper salary is fucking retarded

And that Hispanic guy wasn't at fault at all in the movie because he paid his rent and his faceless landlord was the one at fault

>not getting dubs

My dad sat next to Greg Lippman (the real guy Gosling is playing) on their mortgage trading desk at Credit Suisse-First Boston and then was co-head of mortgage trading at Morgan Stanley with Howie Hubler (important in the book/real life but not in the movie oddly) before/during/after the crash.

I know that doesn't make me relevant but AMA because I can get good answers to any questions about the ordeal.

Was Lippman as douchey as he was intended to be portrayed?

Absolutely. He apparently would come into the office wearing $5000+ fur coats asking everyone to acknowledge how good he looked.

My dad was keeled over laughing when we saw Big Short in theater because he said it was perfect.

I'm curious what does someone at a trading desk actually do? As foolish as that sounds i literally have no idea. Are they trading Mortgage backed securities? Too who?

Why would he know that?

They trade mortgage-related securities to whoever is buying. Includes (but not limited to) other investment banks, corporate entities (oddly enough does happen), Joe from down the street, etc.

They didn't name the jew bankers.

They didn't name the jew house merchants.

They didn't name the jew influenced politicians and laws.

goy/10 movie

yeah, really really really strange, considering that the whole showbusiness is Jewish too..........

>jewornotjew.com/profile.jsp?ID=511

Director is not jewish. Swing and miss.

Eh kinda what i thought. So their practically a broker for mortgage related securities. Thanks user

More of a market maker but sure.

Does he still trade?
Do you know what he trades?

You're fucking dumb. I never said that the director is Jewish, but he'll never be able to make and publish his movie if he names the jew. They'll destroy him

The author of the book that the film is based on, Michael Lewis, is not Jewish either. The film was co-written by Adam McKay, another non-jew. It was distributed by Paramount Pictures though. Dear god look at the names of the executives for Paramount without looking at their pictures and imagine how big their noses are...
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Paramount_executives

>the stripper is portrayed as being "deceived"

But she was deceived. How many conserva-mongs will make the same mistake time and time again of assuming everyone should be intelligent? Because newsflash, most people are fucking dumb.

That's why he have a qualified expert vs unqualified layman dynamic. The idiot should never be blamed for having a mortgage they cant afford, only the person who gave it to them. The person who sells the mortgage has to be qualified to do so. The onus is on them to sell the mortgage responsibly and at a rate that the person can afford to give back.

The movie covers this well; people aren't just idiots for having mortgages - they are told that the house they are taking a mortgage out on will be worth more in a year's time, and they can re-finance. They own multiple homes thinking they're stocking up on assets that will go up and up and up in value.

They are encouraged to do this by mortgage brokers who know full well that it doesn't really matter if they can or cant afford the mortgage because a big bank will buy the debt off them within a day or two.

When idiots are exploited by experts it is retarded to later blame the idiots.

Finally, your point about the government pressuring banks to give homes to people who cant afford them is also mong-tier bullshit. Did the government pressure the banks to bundle together thousands of said mortgages into bonds and then pay off credit agencies to give them AAA ratings, too?

You're just parroting what a few clearly wrong executives tried to claim at the time everything crashed; "It wasn't out fault! It was the government forcing us to give loans to poor people! Blame them!"

Yeah, and now imagine what would've happened if the book named th jew already... I guarantee you, you'd never ever have heard of it, there'd only be some /pol/ conspiracy threads about it.
Same about the movie.

Probably one of the laziest movies I have ever seen. It feels like it was shot over a weekend. All of Christian Bale's shots took place in one set. Moreover, the fourth wall breaking scenes were cringey and pandering. If you like this movie I immediately know you have shit taste in movies and are financially illiterate.

i loved the subject matter.

i didn't like the style (weird editing. weird documentary mimicking. weird fourth wall explanations.)

they pretty much treated the audience like complete and utter morons, and that we wouldn't understand unless everything was exposited.

>they pretty much treated the audience like complete and utter morons, and that we wouldn't understand unless everything was exposited.
Can you blame them? They had to pander to the audience expecting a Wolf of Wall Street for the 2000s.

Depends on what kind of trading desk, but for mbs or any otc products really watch this:
youtube.com/watch?v=IXShqkmV2KE

Tried a bit too hard for my tastes (bathtub scene, every fourth wall break besides "he actually fucking said that"), but it accomplished its goal admirably. Bonus points for having Steve Carell being a gigantic ham.

I know what my dad does because I've spent time on the desk and talked a lot w/ him about it, can't speak to all mortgage desks though.

My dad traded/trades CMOs (Collateralized Mortgage Obligations) as well as other MBS's (Mortgage Backed Securities) while others on his desk trade MBS derivatives.

When at a bulge bracket firm i.e. Morgan Stanley, you're generally market making. MBS pricing isn't as transparent as, say, the equity market. You can also take an MBS like a CMO and spilt it up in new ways to create new products, so there is a lot of opportunity for market makers to respond to their clients orders and do a sort of arbitrage.

was largely right about the "to who" part of your question. Other banks/corporations will buy these products. Joe down the street not so much in MBS markets - not really available to them directly.

Lippman doesn't still trade - at least not in the normal sense of the word. He's in the micro-loan business, potentially trying to securitize micro-loans.

no i can't. it was a good decision. just makes me sad.

So was the firm burry met with for the credit loan swaps, he was using them a an investment vehicle?

this

But Joe down the street is a teacher and, as such, his pension fund buys mortgage-backed securities so Joe down the street has exposure to the mortgage-derivatives markets. I guess he isn't a direct buyer, though.

An ex-trader at Lehman dumping millions of dollars worth of shitty mortgages onto other peoples books before the company goes belly-up? That's hardly a day in the life.

>mfw the guy Christian Bale plays went to my High School

I really liked it, explained the crisis well and easily enough for people who are not in finance to understand the topic.

I was impressed also by the actors they got in the movie too.

I recommend it to my friends.

Was his ass-burgers really that bad?

Opinions on Margin Call?

Good ratings on RT, looks kinda run of the mill though.

9/10 for Spacey's performance.

It was before I went there unfortunately

No, I got the impresion that the stripper was pictured as a dumb slut. I mean the face of steve carrell thinking "what in the fuck" made me lol and showed this without words.

Btw im off to see wolf of wall street, I still havent seen it. Any other good Veeky Forums movies?

how the fuck do I become eloquent and understand all those technical jargons about the scams done in wall street?

Go to university. Or read a lot of Investopedia. Also check out this book:
>jasonzweig.com/dictionary/
It's mostly satire but it's funny as hell and has good information at times.

More realistic than Big Short, good insight into how finance offices are actually run, without the swearing.

so a boring movie?

Financial divisions often gut their competent risk management? Why?

its a perfect movie

So, did it REALLY happen like that?

I mean, the Steve Eisman/Mark Baum conference at the end of the movie, when he says "Boom" and Bear Sterns loses -30% in seconds, BTFOing the bulltard?

Because it was freaking awesome.

Are there any video records of the real life conference?

Watching it now. Smooths over some things, but it's not wrong.

Money. Real risk management costs money.

nice cast

>Money. Real risk management costs money.
Sure, but I'd see it as a considerable gain because as the film showed, gutting risk management can fuck up the whole firm. Pretty dumb move to gut them because of >muh personnel costs

Bro, thats the one scene in the film I fucking hated. A pre-schooler could have formulated a better speech then that.

Before the crash, how much were these guys making per year?

>
they pretty much treated the audience like complete and utter morons, and that we wouldn't understand unless everything was exposited.

Is this not the case for at least 90℅ of Americans?

>banks are pretty corrupt huh? really makes you think

now make a movie about wet water