kjadkjadad
da,mdad
Trending Content - Off Topic Forum
| +45 | I wish I went to an Ivy | 24 | 1d |
| +38 | How tall are you? | 36 | 5h |
| +27 | EpsteinBooks Dispute: Child Molestation Optimization Process | 4 | 3d |
| +23 | Favorite slop bowl for lunch? | 18 | 1d |
| +16 | Is there a solution to this spam? | 5 | 3d |
| +11 | Deldeldel | 8 | 4d |
| +10 | Andrew Tate was arrested. Thoughts? | 9 | 22h |
| Rough Breakup | 8 | 1d | |
| +8 | Ferda | 1 | 2d |
| +6 | Best UE/Seamless orders? | 1 | 5d |
Career Resources
oh shit brb going home with the flu
When does it normally get on USA.com or Hulu.com so I can watch it today? The earlier the better!
I've been a fan of the show, but my patience is beginning to wear down. It's repeating the same schtick and dynamics repeatedly: Harvey being a charismatic dick, Mike always trying to be the white knight for his clients, Louis being a weirdo, etc. I like that Mike has jumped ship to finance, but the season premiere was remarkably dull (aside from the fact that they got the finance totally wrong).
I have to agree. Perhaps most obvious is Rachel just becoming a sex icon on the show. In Season 1, she actually had a distinct character to her, rather than just being 'Mike's girlfriend.' It seems as the show has gone on, that has completely disappeared. Also, it was interesting to see how Mike's new secretary is like Donna, and Mike's new boss is like Harvey. It should be an interesting season, especially given the last scene.
Yeah I just watched it (slow day at work) and I was fairly disappointed. The previous seasons it was slowly turning into a drama, and now, it's gone full drama, and you never go full drama.
Also, pardon my ignorance, but if they are buying companies to get positive returns off the company, wouldn't that make them private equity, not a hedge fund? I was just assuming that they said hedge fund because more people know what a hedge fund is vs. private equity.
Exactly this. I was so confused when watching the show. Are they an investment bank? Hedge fund? PE group?
In the space of two shows they said they were an IB, then he was doing a PE deal then they were running a HF. My wife who's not in finance even caught that one.
@whatsapp12 I'm just assuming that it's going to be more and more drama every single episode and less and less humor and wit like in season 1. If this is the route they are taking, I kind of hope that this is the last season so I don't have to worry about waiting for a season 5 :/ No character has to be a defined character anymore. Everyone just has a purpose now.
I also think it was said just to be relevant to the plebs out there that don't understand the differences of finance. It's like someone name dropping to say they work for JPM IBD when they are a BO assistant.
All I learned from that episode is that everyone is getting laid, the writers got the finance wrong, and the show only has a handful of episodes to turn it around before I give up.
I gave up in the middle of Season 2. Poked my head back in for a little of S3 and then left. I was looking forward to seeing how they do the finance stuff but from this thread it sounds like a pass.
errbody gettin laid
I also thought Mike was going to work in a PE firm now it seems it is a Hedge Fund, I can't really understand.
yeah they messed up the finance terminology
I'll have to agree with the group here. I was moderately disappointed that it wasn't the attention grabber that past episodes have been. I will hang in for the rest of the season - I'm sure it will pick up again. Glad to see that Louis is still hilariously odd.
Anyway as long as there is Rachel I will still watch the show.
"30% returns? Anything less than 50% is unacceptable. We're a hedge fund not a charity."- Sidwell
Kind of made me doubt my future viewing of the show when he said that. It is obvious that the producers didn't do their basic research when they named Mike's new employer SIG... The most painful display of slack research by production--like what someone else already mentioned above me--was when they plainly told the audience that he's going to be an investment banker, and then go on to suggest that he's part of an activist hedge fund. I'm going to try to keep watching it, but it's definitely annoying knowing that the series is going to have more of the same crap as the first episode.
Also, Mike reminds me of how Shia LaDouche's character was portrayed in Wall Street II. One moment he was a trader and in another he was trying to fund a nuclear fusion solution.
Yeah, now that its no longer law, which i am not as familiar with but Wall Street, which I have a good understanding of this is too dumb. The fact that they would conflate 3 professions into one is pretty embarrassing for the production team. Also, Mike's a bit young to have a chauffeured Range Rover...
Good lord guys - it's a TV show, relax! The finance does not have to be accurate.
And @"Skinnayyy" - there are some not so legitimate websites where you can watch immediately - for free. Google it.
I actually was able to watch it on USA's website the morning after it aired. I was quite surprised. It was even on Hulu too! I figured it would take at least a day to get put up on those.
Also,
@setacros does have something going. Now that I am thinking, in last season Sigwell worked for someone else(can't remember the name, still too early in the morning), and at that point they were investment bankers. NOW he's running a hedge fund. So I guess that part checks out. But the rest of it is still a load of crap.
Show sucks now. Waiting for house of cards.
I think you can 'explain' the finance aspects, though it requires a great deal of rationalisation.
Sale of distribution centres has a 30% return, but we aren't told the size of the division, nor are we told the timing of the funding (it's not like the company buying this rocks up with cash).
IB's run internal HF's. SIG is a spinoff (maybe?) of the other financial corp - we don't know the full corporate relationship here.
Finally bottom line HF's can do PE stuff. I was never under the illusion it would be PE though as it's obviously public market-facing.
house of cards is my shit now
The episode was crap but I didn't come here to post that. Whoever says Donna is sexier than Rachel is just..... wrong... very wrong.... no other way to put it.
You're absolutely right. It's just insane to think that way.
Maybe they will tie the finance story together; I would like to see some semblance of reality in the show. I'm not expecting the producers to be CFA holders or something, but blatant contradictions are a turn off, especially when you have people outside of the industry noticing, @"Dingdong08".
One redeeming quality about the show is how Mike is sacking up now, which is refreshing. It will probably be interesting to see the evolving dynamic between him and Harvey. Hopefully, his whining/therapy sessions with Rachel are done too.
Eligendi exercitationem et cupiditate veniam impedit suscipit. Animi et unde non veniam et. Vel molestias minus atque occaecati excepturi. Dignissimos nisi soluta voluptatem saepe sed. Temporibus natus rerum iusto dolore similique suscipit corrupti voluptatem.
Rem doloremque dignissimos est est adipisci pariatur molestias. Eius rem eaque rerum tenetur omnis nesciunt aut. Eligendi enim nisi cupiditate a aliquam doloribus quam. Molestiae quam aut facilis repellendus officiis commodi eius. Neque fuga veritatis eveniet fuga doloribus vitae.
Veniam ab ex autem occaecati ad quas natus blanditiis. Qui placeat fugiat voluptas sint similique ut quos. Aut laboriosam qui iure dolores autem.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Tempore quidem alias dolores quasi odio commodi. Est quae et sunt aut praesentium. Totam voluptate eos et repudiandae. Ratione fugit aut quo ea beatae.
Quam non rerum velit quaerat voluptate repudiandae corrupti. Aut quis non ipsam quibusdam dolores adipisci. Eveniet quasi perferendis et nisi. Molestiae odit corporis culpa in. Optio perferendis nam non dolorem doloribus ut rerum. Et a in mollitia voluptatem modi corporis.
Et officia commodi sunt aut et nihil. Asperiores praesentium ut culpa quia nemo reprehenderit minima.
Iusto quas amet non voluptas et est et. Sunt provident id in. Deserunt quis optio totam officiis. Enim sunt voluptatem voluptatem possimus. Sint repellendus cumque id molestias. Veritatis repudiandae nisi sit vel quisquam assumenda quod.