WELCOME TO RIVER DAVES PLACE

Didn't Lift A Finger!

Looking Glass

1 = Well = Known = Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2020
Messages
1,320
Reaction score
1,213
MacKenzie Scott, former Mrs Jeff Bezos, donated 1.7 Billion Dollars to 116 different Organizations Tackling Social Issues last Wednesday. Friday afternoon she made that and more back.

It is just incredible and hard to comprehend that the "AMAZON" Machine is a never seen before Business Monster.
 

was thatguy

living in a cage of fear
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
36,132
Reaction score
45,373
Didn’t Jeff himself make $13 billion in one day?
 

LargeOrangeFont

Steers With Throttle
Joined
Sep 4, 2015
Messages
22,951
Reaction score
28,840
Where’s = The BEEF?


They got divorced, she got a portion of Amazon stock. The end.

I have news for you.... the retail arm of Amazon = Ain’t shit.

AWS and Amazon AI and data collection own your entire brain and soul. The profits from Amazon retail fund the AWS and data collection projects.
 

LuauLounge

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2010
Messages
1,388
Reaction score
1,639
Got interested in Amazon in 1997. Watching their “Oh, by the way companies” at earnings time.
They just got approved by the FCC to deploy 3,236 low orbit satellites for Internet connectivity. Cost $10 billion. Chump change. Waiting for the Govt to “break them up”, take a 1.5 TRILLION dollar company and divide it up X number of ways worth 2 TRILLION.
 

WhatExit?

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2017
Messages
8,094
Reaction score
15,652
Amazon is evil - the worst of the corporate giants that sell their souls and sell out America to be in bed with Communist China. The power that Jeff Bezos has - far beyond money - should frighten all of us as his/their power grows, free speech is censored and they support BLM and Marxism.
 

rrrr

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
9,191
Reaction score
13,956
Over the last couple of years, it seems like every time there has been big jumps in certain stocks, I've seen headline after headline that are all some variation of "The rich got richer today".

The stories then go on to detail how Bezos, Musk, et al made hundreds of millions of dollars in the previous week or whatever.

None of these articles state the actual facts. Increases in stock prices don't make those people wealthier. It's a paper increase. Yeah, they hold those stocks. But that doesn't put money in their pockets. Obviously they would have to sell the stocks to realize the gains.

That would trigger several unpalatable events. Once the stocks are sold, capital gains taxes become due. Selling stocks also terminates any future returns on those shares, so any share price increases would be of no value to the seller.

But the biggest consequence of selling stocks is this. Almost all of the super rich moguls have huge holdings in their own companies.

If a principal in one of the big tech firms, say Larry Ellison of Oracle, sells some of his holdings, the market would immediately take notice. Since Ellison owns 1.1 billion shares of Oracle, about 35% of the company, observers would consider this an indication that Ellison believes Oracle stock is overvalued and that he is getting out before the share price declines.

This perception would immediately trigger a selloff of Oracle shares, as money managers and individuals react to Ellison's apparent lack of confidence in his own company. The share price would tumble, wiping out hundreds of millions of Ellison's fortune.

So, generally speaking, as share prices of such companies continue to rise, those that have significant holdings avoid selling any large amounts of shares. Increases in share prices produce those headlines that result in outcries from Democrat politicians and social justice warriors. But Larry Ellison and his contemporaries ignore it.
 

bocco

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2008
Messages
1,519
Reaction score
1,233
Back in the 90s I worked for a company called 3Com. They did well in the dot com boom. The president had policy of selling the same amount of stock on the same day every month no matter what the news or the price. That way nobody could assume that there was underlying news to trigger a sell off.
 

Jgarrison

Active Member
Joined
May 5, 2020
Messages
39
Reaction score
53
Over the last couple of years, it seems like every time there has been big jumps in certain stocks, I've seen headline after headline that are all some variation of "The rich got richer today".

The stories then go on to detail how Bezos, Musk, et al made hundreds of millions of dollars in the previous week or whatever.

None of these articles state the actual facts. Increases in stock prices don't make those people wealthier. It's a paper increase. Yeah, they hold those stocks. But that doesn't put money in their pockets. Obviously they would have to sell the stocks to realize the gains.

That would trigger several unpalatable events. Once the stocks are sold, capital gains taxes become due. Selling stocks also terminates any future returns on those shares, so any share price increases would be of no value to the seller.

But the biggest consequence of selling stocks is this. Almost all of the super rich moguls have huge holdings in their own companies.

If a principal in one of the big tech firms, say Larry Ellison of Oracle, sells some of his holdings, the market would immediately take notice. Since Ellison owns 1.1 billion shares of Oracle, about 35% of the company, observers would consider this an indication that Ellison believes Oracle stock is overvalued and that he is getting out before the share price declines.

This perception would immediately trigger a selloff of Oracle shares, as money managers and individuals react to Ellison's apparent lack of confidence in his own company. The share price would tumble, wiping out hundreds of millions of Ellison's fortune.

So, generally speaking, as share prices of such companies continue to rise, those that have significant holdings avoid selling any large amounts of shares. Increases in share prices produce those headlines that result in outcries from Democrat politicians and social justice warriors. But Larry Ellison and his contemporaries ignore it.
but all these big CEOs borrow against their shares. This is how they get liquidity without filing a form 4 notifying the public they sold stock and essentially diluted their own stock. If the stock price goes down they will get margin calls, share price goes up they can leverage more. There was a time a couple years ago Elon was getting margin called by Morgan Stanley and I am almost certain was almost forced to sell stock but they stock price rose. It’s a slippery slope when share prices go down for these CEOs
 

Spudsbud

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2012
Messages
2,015
Reaction score
2,450
I used to work for a fortune 100 co.
A buddy in mid upper mgmnt. Finally qualified for stock optionsand discount purchasing program.
He attended a class on how to buy and sell randomly large blocks of shares a couple times a month..... kinda whenever to establish a random pattern. Soooo if the event ever came up that the SEC questioned large block sales JUST before stock news causing a drop..... they'd be clear!
Because insider trading is wrong!
 

Jgarrison

Active Member
Joined
May 5, 2020
Messages
39
Reaction score
53
I used to work for a fortune 100 co.
A buddy in mid upper mgmnt. Finally qualified for stock optionsand discount purchasing program.
He attended a class on how to buy and sell randomly large blocks of shares a couple times a month..... kinda whenever to establish a random pattern. Soooo if the event ever came up that the SEC questioned large block sales JUST before stock news causing a drop..... they'd be clear!
Because insider trading is wrong!
This is to avoid insider trading though not necessarily just selling stock. Insiders can also file a 10b 5-1 plan with their broker if they are concerned with insider trading, but again this gives notice to insiders selling which to the market is sometimes a negative or red flag, a lot easier if you have a billion in stock in your company to borrow 100 million against it with the stock acting as security for the debt and simply pay margin on the note.
 

DrunkenSailor

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2017
Messages
5,168
Reaction score
5,847
Amazon is evil - the worst of the corporate giants that sell their souls and sell out America to be in bed with Communist China. The power that Jeff Bezos has - far beyond money - should frighten all of us as his/their power grows, free speech is censored and they support BLM and Marxism.
This is the part of the argument that looses me. Why would the most successful company in america today under a free market society want to change to communism? I can see amazon being in bed with china because china is their manufacturing arm and china loves selling all their cheaply made goods for huge markups in america. None of that works if america is communist...
 

WhatExit?

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2017
Messages
8,094
Reaction score
15,652
This is the part of the argument that looses me. Why would the most successful company in america today under a free market society want to change to communism? I can see amazon being in bed with china because china is their manufacturing arm and china loves selling all their cheaply made goods for huge markups in america. None of that works if america is communist...
Good question. It's more complicated than the simple point I was trying to make. The issues with giant corporations is that most are in bed with the left. The left is headed past Socialism to Marxism/Communism. And Marxists/Communists are all about power for the ELITES which includes political "leaders" and giant corporations which are then controlled (allowed to exist while being taxed heavily) by the political leaders at the top.

The Left's Marxism plan uses the radicals to create mayhem in our society while their political leaders - Mayors and Governors - continue to have record crime, shootings, killings, and awful educational system results. This feeds into the narrative that the country is broken and they can fix it.

Meanwhile, the super-wealthy people running these giant corporations support the Left with huge political donations and censorship of the opposition party to keep the Left in power because they support their greed and success (at all costs). Google/YouTube, Facebook and Twitter all are heavily censoring everything they don't agree with. And the politicians have allowed them to have obscene power that in the decades before Congress would have stopped (and broken up their monopolies too).

Guys like Bezos with more money than anyone are super dangerous to anyone he doesn't agree with. Just one example: Bezos bought and owns the Washington Post. If you see their "news" you know their far left position on everything.

Marxist regimes have those in control at the top and everyone else are their subjects
 
Top