Information Sources

TNA's picture
TNA - Certified Professional
Rank: The Pro | banana points 38,302

So I was at dinner last night and really lamenting the information sources available nowadays. I am looking for some suggestions of either magazines, journals (academic or other), as well as research sources. Looking for science, medical, foreign affairs, economics, technology, anything other than current events or business.

Some of the things I have read over the years or still do read

National Affairs
Chatham House
FDA
Nature
Reason

Website stuff

Anyone have anything else? I realize a similar, but not the same, post was done over the last months. This is more about long form articles or other sources to read in depth about a subject without having to comb the internet for sources, etc. My time is getting more limited and I would love to have a number of publications subscribed to that I could get a packaged, thoughtful, report and expand on it if I decide to.

Thanks.

Hi Anonymous Monkey, upload your resume and land a job

Members that upload a resume get 2.3x the number of interview invites through the Talent Oasis. Learn more.

Comments (90)

Mar 10, 2017

Hi TNA, I'm a graduating senior and first I want to thank you for helping me evaluate my profile several days ago in your MSF 2018 post.

I read BI, Reuters, Economist, FT, sometimes McKinsey Insights and Bain Insights. I know that you definitely have more knowledge on newspapers/magazines stuff, but I feel that FT and Reuters (usually the Money and Deals sections) are really good resources. FT digs deeper, while Reuters has a broader range of stories. Those two insights are pretty good too IMO.

I'm not sure if that helps. I hope so.

    • 1
Learn More

Side-by-side comparison of top modeling training courses + exclusive discount through WSO here.

Nov 10, 2017

Few recommendations (no particular order)..

1) I've come across a number small random local libraries that offer online resources to the public. If you search around, youll be able to find either posts on their site or PDFs they've circulated with shared logins/passwords to sites like JSTOR, EBSCO, GALE, PROQUEST, Journals...

2) Become proficient with Google Boolean Syntax. Particular query refinements that I have found useful are:
* filetype: limits search results to a specified file type (Example: filetype:xls or filetype:pdf)
* :site: limits results to specified source site (Example: :site:wallstreetoasis.com/ TNA)
... there are a ton of these operators that might help you in your search..

3) Big fan of a number of daily newsletters. Some that come to mind:
* Finimize
* MarketSnacks
* Quartz Daily Brief
* Dealbreaker
* FORTUNEs Term Sheet
* SeekingAlphas SA Morning Briefing
* Barchart Morning Call

Also might consider subscribing to PIMCO Publications.

Hope this helps.

    • 1
Nov 19, 2017

Are there any better free stock sites than seekingalpha. I find the articles there extremely weak. Often only reciting what is already known.

I'd argue that site is actually a huge hindrance to retail money

Array
Dec 6, 2017

Valueinvestorsclub.com is still active but you need to submit a pitch for full access. It is hard to get accepted and some pitches can win you money.

You can still access ideas without becoming a full member on a 45 day hold, lots of really good research to read.

Another is sumzero but I think you need to be a member and work on the buyside to read anything there.

Nov 19, 2017
notoriousbb:

2) Become proficient with Google Boolean Syntax. Particular query refinements that I have found useful are:
* filetype: limits search results to a specified file type (Example: filetype:xls or filetype:pdf)
* :site: limits results to specified source site (Example: :site:wallstreetoasis.com/ TNA)
... there are a ton of these operators that might help you in your search..

I use this a lot but Google is always asking me to prove I'm not a robot.

Nov 10, 2017

Now that I'm done abusing you, I will make a couple of science suggestions:

Dec 6, 2017

Refreshing thread

Dec 6, 2017

We live in a post-modern world. There is no unbiased source.

Dec 6, 2017

Nope.

Nov 10, 2017

Curious about the penchant for journal/magazine type publications. I'm an avid reader, but it almost entirely consists of non-fiction books, aside from the various websites I skim.

Is it a matter of greater exposure and more horizontal knowledge and interests? Maybe, that the research and articles are more contemporary?

Just trying to figure out what I'm missing and whether it's worth adding a few into my arsenal.

Realize you're not necessarily soliciting website sources, but the Neurologicablog is worth reading. Good deconstruction of current scientific articles and claims with a really strong, lively comment section.

Dec 6, 2017

WSO a bad source? That's blasphemy

Dec 6, 2017

wrr

Dec 6, 2017

I think you need to look deeper at the axioms underlying the 'no news' diet. It essentially proposes that you should spend the time that you use to read news to read deeper material, essentially boiling down to the philosophies of different fields of study (mathematics, economics, science, politics, ethics etc). You would then ideally construct your own models of understanding the world and implement these. Essentially you'd aim to become a Nassim Taleb.

The benefits of this is that you're no longer a sheep, because you understand the schema's driving the news and attempt to find patterns in it. The cons to this are many; first of all, if you're in the markets and you're not aware of the current information available then you're dumb money, second of all you will begin to sound like a wanker because you can't help but utilise a more sophisticated lexicon and you'll have a habit of bringing up dead white men (much like Taleb does).

Dec 6, 2017
setarcos:

I think you need to look deeper at the axioms underlying the 'no news' diet. It essentially proposes that you should spend the time that you use to read news to read deeper material, essentially boiling down to the philosophies of different fields of study (mathematics, economics, science, politics, ethics etc). You would then ideally construct your own models of understanding the world and implement these. Essentially you'd aim to become a Nassim Taleb.

The benefits of this is that you're no longer a sheep, because you understand the schema's driving the news and attempt to find patterns in it. The cons to this are many; first of all, if you're in the markets and you're not aware of the current information available then you're dumb money, second of all you will begin to sound like a wanker because you can't help but utilise a more sophisticated lexicon and you'll have a habit of bringing up dead white men (much like Taleb does).

When I read Taleb, I can't tell whether he's trying to sound pretentious or I'm just that dumb compared to him.

Dec 6, 2017

WSO is only a waste of time if you let it be. You can spend your timing reading threads that are very relevant to your career aspirations, or you can spend countless hours reading about things that are completely irrelevant to your career aspirations. In either case, the quality of gossip on here is way more intelectually stimulating than my FB news feed, although lacking in the cleavage department.

Competition is a sin.

-John D. Rockefeller

    • 2
Dec 6, 2017

Using 1-2 news sources tends to be very problematic, especially in finance, since each news source tends to have a niche (business for Bloomberg/WSJ, politics for The Hill/Politico, etc). Instead, it's better to have 3 sources, at least, to stay informed. My personal preferences are for a local newspaper with a broad scope (Washington Post, NY Times), a finance-specific publication (Bloomberg, WSJ), and an international source (Economist, FT).

Quality is also highly variable based on individual taste. I love The Good Wife, but given my age, that puts me in a slight minority, given that the show's audience consists primarily of 55+ year olds; a lot of my friends like Glee and Modern Family, which I don't enjoy. The same goes for books. You'll know quality when you see it, but living exclusively on Citizen Kane-type films and highbrow literature alone is enough to drive anyone insane. It's OK to have your guilty pleasure or two.

TED, while nice on the surface, also isn't particularly enlightening. It's like looking at an uplifting but suitably vague photo. Instead, much like setarcos said, it's better to read deeper material in science, history, and the like if you want to become well-informed in the subjects than watching a happy-go-lucky 16 minute video message of "knowledge is power!". Granted, there's a time and place for those videos, too.

Finally, while I like Tim Ferriss's general message (the whole don't check your email 100 times a day, don't be a drone, etc), the guy's writing is like that of a snake oil salesman: very self-promotional and sensational. There are much better books/sites to better yourself by.

    • 1
Dec 6, 2017
m56:

Using 1-2 news sources tends to be very problematic, especially in finance, since each news source tends to have a niche (business for Bloomberg/WSJ, politics for The Hill/Politico, etc). Instead, it's better to have 3 sources, at least, to stay informed. My personal preferences are for a local newspaper with a broad scope (Washington Post, NY Times), a finance-specific publication (Bloomberg, WSJ), and an international source (Economist, FT).

Quality is also highly variable based on individual taste. I love The Good Wife, but given my age, that puts me in a slight minority, given that the show's audience consists primarily of 55+ year olds; a lot of my friends like Glee and Modern Family, which I don't enjoy. The same goes for books. You'll know quality when you see it, but living exclusively on Citizen Kane-type films and highbrow literature alone is enough to drive anyone insane. It's OK to have your guilty pleasure or two.

TED, while nice on the surface, also isn't particularly enlightening. It's like looking at an uplifting but suitably vague photo. Instead, much like setarcos said, it's better to read deeper material in science, history, and the like if you want to become well-informed in the subjects than watching a happy-go-lucky 16 minute video message of "knowledge is power!". Granted, there's a time and place for those videos, too.

Finally, while I like Tim Ferriss's general message (the whole don't check your email 100 times a day, don't be a drone, etc), the guy's writing is like that of a snake oil salesman: very self-promotional and sensational. There are much better books/sites to better yourself by.

setarcos:

I think you need to look deeper at the axioms underlying the 'no news' diet. It essentially proposes that you should spend the time that you use to read news to read deeper material, essentially boiling down to the philosophies of different fields of study (mathematics, economics, science, politics, ethics etc). You would then ideally construct your own models of understanding the world and implement these. Essentially you'd aim to become a Nassim Taleb.

The benefits of this is that you're no longer a sheep, because you understand the schema's driving the news and attempt to find patterns in it. The cons to this are many; first of all, if you're in the markets and you're not aware of the current information available then you're dumb money, second of all you will begin to sound like a wanker because you can't help but utilise a more sophisticated lexicon and you'll have a habit of bringing up dead white men (much like Taleb does).

What do you guys suggest in terms of reading deeply into history or economics? Would khan academy do the trick?

Dec 6, 2017

Khan Academy is fine for teaching yourself the basic concepts to do well in class, but it's definitely not good for diving deeply into something.

History and economics also tend to be politically biased based on the writer, so if you're not strongly leaning one way or the other, read books from both the left and the right to form your own view. For history, I'd go with A Patriot's History of the United States for the right and A People's History of the US from the left. If you're into European history, a textbook might be a good idea; I'm a fan of Birdsall's Modern European History. For econ, I'd start following the news and read up on the 2008 crisis online, and learn basic econ by taking micro and macro at school, or by reading books like Thomas Sowell's Basic Economics.

Dec 6, 2017

I would suggest (apologies for again seeming like an ivory-tower academic), you understand the meta-narrative of the fields, again diving into the philosophy of it.

For example, 'history' can mean quite a few things and raise quite a few different questions, such as what 'sources' do we rely upon, and how much weight do we give them (primary, such as a photograph which offers authority from the time but less information than say a secondary source (such as a written history of the time after the fact)? Do we seek objectivity or subjectivity (do we judge the Nazi's/Russians on their actions or do we simply say that they are a product of their times)? Etc.

For simplicity's sake, if you want to understand a specific period in history, you need to read the 'first' account, usually the traditional view (for example JFK was amazing), then the revisionist's account (JFK was not amazing) then the post-revisionist's account (JFK was pretty good, but had his vice's), this is the 'usual' dialogue. As for the actual 'sources' of this history, identify the predominate authority on the period, and read it, anything else you would read is simply a watered down version of that.

For Economics you need to break it down into the 'science' aspect of economic models, and the 'liberal arts' political economy aspect. Reading Keynes and Hayek won't make you brilliant at modelling supply and demand nor the relationship between inflation and unemployment, but it means you understand 'why' you model it as such. For the science aspect I recommend Khan Academy, for the 'liberal arts' aspect I reccomend reading Adam Smith, Hayek, Keynes, and if you're feeling a bit more interested in deeper underpinnings, Bentham (for an understanding of what 'utility' is). This would naturally introduce you to the area of ethics, because economics assumes utility maximisation, or a utilitarian view of the world, which is itself not the 'only' way one can judge what is 'best', and can be contrasted with deontological and virtue-based ethical models.

Now this appears TLDR; but if you want to actually swim with the smartest guys in the room, you're going to need to not only how to model financials/economy etc, but also understand what drives our thought-process, because that's where true insight comes from.

Nov 10, 2017

Economist, FT, NatGeo, MIT Technology Review, Muscle & Fitness

Dec 6, 2017

I think you're talking about www.bledstate.com. Here is the thread.

http://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/my-new-busin...
Looks like the site is shut down.

Dec 6, 2017

I read the BBC, economist and foreign policy. Honestly, shit that is blatantly left or right tends to be low intelligence. Reuters is pretty good also.

Masters in Finance HQ - The #1 site for everything related to the MSF degree!
MSFHQ

    • 1
Dec 6, 2017
TNA:

I read the BBC, economist and foreign policy. Honestly, shit that is blatantly left or right tends to be low intelligence. Reuters is pretty good also.

I read Foreign Policy Magazine, too, on my Kindle. Honestly though, most of its articles demonstrate the quality of critical thought that a college freshman would have. It's the same type of people who were calling Ronald Reagan a warmongering fool who would lead America to ruin.

Dec 6, 2017

Two wrongs don't make a right

Dec 6, 2017

WallStreetOasis.com

Incoming Ash Ketchum, Pokemon Master
Literally a problem, solve for both X and Y, please and thank you.
Hugh Myron: "Are there any guides on here for getting a top girlfriend? Think banker/lawyer/doctor. I really don't want to go mid-tier"

Dec 6, 2017

WSJ and The Economist, although even the journal is prone to click-bait these days.

If you can't read between the lines on "liberal" or "conservative" news though the fault is your own. If CNN is on in the office, I know what to expect. If Fox News is on, I know what to expect. If MSNBC was ever allowed to be on, I would know what to expect. Don't be so easily influenced by others.

Dec 6, 2017

Honestly, I've found that the best news sources tend to be based outside the US. There's a case of severe groupthink in the US media and I'd even venture to say that most of them are little more than glorified PR agents for the parties/politicians/interests they represent or that own their companies.

Hell.....look at the economic reporting in Europe. They've been MUCH more honest and accurate in their reporting regarding the sovereign debt crisis. Nobody in the US press(even economic reporting like the WSJ) won't even touch the issue and when they do there's a blatant tone of trying to soothe over fears.

Dec 6, 2017

Also, US press tends to be a bit myopic, and they almost always analyze business/economics by looking at the Domestic picture only. The real world doesn't work like that. In reality every single market and capital flow impact each other, so any analysis that that focuses only on the domestic picture can only be right coincidentally or because other influencing factors are weak.

Dec 6, 2017

They just know their audience. Anything "foreign" immediately alienates people, for whatever reason.

For example, the FIFA scandal. "I DON"T CARE!!!1" and "SOCCER IS NAHT A SPORT!!!q1" are not intelligence responses to one of the greatest bribery scandals in history, that has literally led to the deaths of thousands of people, yet these are overwhelming the responses out of America, even as high as ESPN analysts.

tl;dr - people are dumb

Dec 6, 2017

Interesting point. I get the WSJ delivered to my doorstep every morning and when I get to the topic of "FIFA Scandal" my eyes glaze over and I move on. I still don't even know the basics about what went on.

Dec 6, 2017

True CRE, but for my purposes the reason why reporting is inaccurate (whether that be pandering to a stupid audience, an agenda, or "influence" from government interests) is less important than the fact that is inaccurate.

For me the thing that makes FIFA boring is that it's been an open secret for years that getting anything out of them required massive amounts of money under the table......and it's still peanuts compared to what the Clintons have been doing.

Learn More

Side-by-side comparison of top modeling training courses + exclusive discount through WSO here.

Nov 12, 2017

Howard Marks' memos on OakTree's site

Dec 6, 2017

I have two apps that I check every couple of hours, and they worth it, IMO.

1) Bloomberg
2) Reuters

Dec 6, 2017

Between that pages that you have cited I prefer Bloomberg.
But I also use more generalist sources to follow the opinion of the less experienced or educated people that mostly use them.

Because, it's easier for you to find and take adventage of his misinterpretations of the News of that unformed people.

Stay hungry, stay foolish.

Dec 6, 2017

The issue with WSJ and Bloomberg is they are backward looking and very US focused. They are ok BC you do need to have an idea of what's has happened, but they won't help you come up with good investment ideas or develop your own forward looking opinions on markets. Of the non-professional sources I like the economist because they are more willing to take a stab at what could happen and the implications (you don't have to agree with what they say...as long as it stretches your thinking). You make money on what's not priced in by the market going forward, not the news that has occured.

Dec 6, 2017
Vagabond85:

The issue with WSJ and Bloomberg is they are backward looking and very US focused. They are ok BC you do need to have an idea of what's has happened, but they won't help you come up with good investment ideas or develop your own forward looking opinions on markets. Of the non-professional sources I like the economist because they are more willing to take a stab at what could happen and the implications (you don't have to agree with what they say...as long as it stretches your thinking). You make money on what's not priced in by the market going forward, not the news that has occured.

Disagree with the WSJ comment. Yes, if you take the content there for its face value, then you'll be trading on yesterday's news. If, however, you take that content, consider what companies/industries are being affected by the news, followup with those ideas every few weeks, then you'll probably have some good ideas to work with. Everyone forgets what the hell was in last week's paper, people have awful memories.

Dec 6, 2017

If you want news that directly impacts your job assuming your job is investment related, wsj is non negotiable, bloomberg is good too. If you want to be well read, economist is good. If you work for a bb subscribe to your in house economist's research, he or she will tell you what you need to know. Beyond that, it's all gravy. I personally recommend reading what money managers have to say, for example bob doll Jeremy grantham Howard marks bill gross joe dean etc. pm me if you want to chat further

Dec 6, 2017

Financial times, wsj , bloomberg

Dec 6, 2017

Bloomberg, financial times, economist suffice for me. Occasionally blogs when I come across sth interesting.

Dec 6, 2017

I'm signed up for the Dealbook email from NYT, and several FT emails. Those are pretty good for world / investment news.

Dec 6, 2017

Keep all those..all are important. You will find there uses in the future.

Dec 6, 2017

Add Twitter. Follow every possible news source, financial blogger (There are a lot of really good ones out there aside from the guys you see on tv) etc. You will realize quickly that twitter is able to aggregate breaking news about as fast as anything else out there. Period. People made fun of me around here until I was getting news as quickly as Bloomberg terminals. It is truly incredible how much information you can get from twitter. Yeah, some of it sucks and may not be perfect but good luck finding anything that works as well once you follow enough people/sources.

Aside from that, I'd add in Dealbreaker, TheReformedBroker and Zerohedge. Look, I get that ZeroHedge is largely satirical, sarcastic and borderline 'onion' sometimes but it does have really interesting stuff and in my opinion you always need a source that extreme in it's views to help keep your biases in check.

Nov 12, 2017

Full access to PubMed is nice. I had it last year.

Dec 6, 2017

wall street journal

Dec 6, 2017
Dec 6, 2017

WSJ, FT

Dec 6, 2017

but better to bring up some past transactions the company has been involved in.

Dec 6, 2017

Kudlow and Company
5Pm Est. CNBC

Best Response
Nov 12, 2017

TNA, part of your problem is that you are reading FAKE NEWS from sources such as magazines, websites, textbooks, peer reviewed publications, etc. I would cut the bullshit and get your information from a more reliable and infallible source.

I'm sure you already know what I mean ... the voodoo art of reading chicken bones and other appendages of critters!

This source is completely commie proof ;).

    • 5
    • 1
Dec 6, 2017

Public Comps for MM or bigger US companies
1. CapIQ for capital structure and LTM, Factset/Bloomberg for estimates
2. Check research
3. Check press releases
4. Check against bloomberg
If you do those things, and your multiples make sense, your comps are probably right.

Nov 13, 2017

There is a blog I would recommend to everyone called the Farnamstreetblog. It covers almost every topic and it's got lots of podcasts with prominent figures from all industries. There is a powerful section that I frequent every week: https://www.farnamstreetblog.com/mental-models - basically what Charlie Munger calls a "latticework" of mental models. It's pure genius and I'd encourage everyone to learn at least 5 mental models each week.

    • 1
Nov 12, 2017

Mental Models - interesting concept I'm going to look into further.

    • 1
Nov 12, 2017

Good stuff thanks

Dec 6, 2017

The economist has a business this week section (http://www.economist.com/business/)that normally provides a good overview of key events during the week.

www.sharpeinvesting.com

Dec 6, 2017

briefing.com

"Oh the ladies ever tell you that you look like a fucking optical illusion" - Frank Slaughtery 25th Hour.

Dec 6, 2017

briefing isn't bad for recap, bberg and reuters in real-time

Nov 12, 2017

One of the popular things to do in the academic world is to read publishing's of those with differing views to yours. Find a couple blogs/journals that you enjoy and read them. It's nice to see what the other side is thinking and the reasoning behind that (assuming it's an educated editor/writer and not some media bs).

Some of my faves blogs is http://larrysummers.com/category/blog/Larry's an interesting economist and he provides reasoning behind his thought process

One of my fave journals is https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/world-poli... politics are always fun to follow

    • 1
Dec 6, 2017

How about the research section on institutional investor. It's mostly just rankings but there is some information that could be of some use to you.

Nov 12, 2017

Uh I'm not sure if this is relevant for you at all but the only remaining "news" I follow is whatever is published by the American Mathematical Society through social media (usually obituaries or congratulatory articles for rising mathematicians or current professional mathematicians). I know they publish journals (like any other academic organizations) although I'm not sure how remotely useful they would be for someone without a math PhD (but maybe you have one?)

I know WSJ gets flak but I like reading their obituaries, they write some articles on pretty interesting people now and then. I guess I read some pretty lame news though.

National Geographic is still pretty reliable though I think? Lots of cool stuff there! I read it with a grain of salt though.

Again we may have totally different tastes..

Dec 6, 2017

DealBook, from the New York Times, is a great resourece. It covers just about every major deal and also has some new columns/features (they just expanded their staff).

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/

Dec 6, 2017

Dealbook, WSJ/WSJ Deal Journal, The Deal Magazine...

Dec 6, 2017

What industry?

General:

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/ (PE/VC/IB/HF news)
http://www.americanbanker.com/
http://www.efinancialnews.com/investmentbanking
Private Equity focus:

http://www.pehub.com/- private equity deals

International:

http://www.

Probably already know about some of these (like NYT & FT), but figured I'd just throw them out there.

Dec 6, 2017
Wall Street Mentors:

What industry?

TMT

Thanks for the suggestions...

Dec 6, 2017

Bloomberg, too

Dec 6, 2017

Does anyone get The Deal magazine? I was looking to get a subscription but it's $300 a year and they sadly don't have any student rates.

Dec 6, 2017
meph:

Does anyone get The Deal magazine? I was looking to get a subscription but it's $300 a year and they sadly don't have any student rates.

Maybe your university's business school has an online subscription to it? Mine did, check your library resources.

Nov 12, 2017

3quarksdaily dot com might be interesting for you. Basically bunch of guys search through internet and collect well written articles.

Dec 6, 2017

It's a tricky question because the sites the finance sites I use require a subscription. If you are at school it could be useful to see if you could get a cheap / free subscription.

Capital IQ - I get transcripts here, can also get quotes, charts, and tons of other data
Thomson One - we have a desktop app, this is my primary work screen where I track stock prices

If I have to get a quick quote, sometimes I'll go to Google or Yahoo quickly, but they are both very subpar compared to CapIQ and ThomsonOne. They are typically very accurate for stock prices, but other things like market cap, shares outstanding, and EPS are much less reliable. For companies where the fiscal year does not coincide with the calendar year, there are additional concerns as it is sometimes unclear which Q1 these sites are referencing. They often only have GAAP financials, and if you pull the Income Statement off Google or Yahoo the numbers often won't match my model - these sites will automatically calculate things like gross profit margin and this causes problems.

As for Google vs. Yahoo? I use Google more but that's just for quotes. If I had to rely on one of these sites for my info, I may choose Yahoo as it seems to have less automation with the numbers.

Other sites I use include
EDGAR - SEC filings
PACER - legal docs
WSJ
I also follow a number of very targeted tech blogs, which are laser focused on my industry.
I also follow the sites of tangential companies to my space, ie if company x puts out a whitepaper... I'm reading it.

Dec 6, 2017

Any responsible analyst will troll their industry specific trade shows and websites.

But generally speaking, ER all uses YHOO/GOOG finance to pull quick quotes and uses Bloomberg/Thomson/Factset to pull quick financials and news flash.

And of course twitter.

Dec 6, 2017

sec.gov

Nov 13, 2017

For longer form pieces I like abnormal returns (especially the long form curation on the weekends), farnam street weekly email (list of 5 links as well a few blog posts), and Khe Hy's Rad Reads (mix of deeper articles). I'm also a member of the farnam street learning community which I've really like, happy to answer more if anyone is curious.

Nov 15, 2017

Interested in hearing about your experience in the farnamstreet learning community. Long time reader of the blog, several plus years now, but initially balked at the price of joining. Curious to hear more.

Dec 6, 2017

marketfolly, abnormal returns, credit bubble stocks, quartz, sober look, dealbook, brooklyn investor, beyond proxy, valuewalk, recode, dan primack term sheet

    • 1
Dec 6, 2017

basehitinvesting

    • 1
Dec 6, 2017
Dec 6, 2017
    • 1
Dec 6, 2017
Nov 19, 2017
Array
Nov 21, 2017

Monkey see. Monkey Doo [Doo].