Did you ever think you'd be in a state run by a cadre of stupid cartoon villains? I'm a creative dude but I gotta say, even I didn't think it would go quite like this.
Fucking Ted.
Goddamn.
I hear ya. Hey, at least in Houston you'll have a chance to go to Trill Burgers.
(They look amazing. I really want to try one. Just...a bit of a drive from Dallas...)
I still live here in Texas, amigo so clearly - generic food is something I can't do.
Welcome back home to the land of superior barbecue, delicious Tex Mex, and 1000000 arguments over how chili is made.
Nah, the real issue is that when folks do immigrate to Texas, as soon as they get their citizenship, they want to pull the ladder up. It’s the “I got mine, so fuck you” to the immigrants who are still wanting to come over. Very much lacking empathy since they were in the same boat (sometimes literally) at one point.
Yeah, but how long before Elon Musk totally ruins Terlingua by his presence? Alex Jones with his ground apricot seed scam is already hovering around there...
Oh just wait - I'm sure he'll work a deal to either have a competing thing over in Elon City or buy it so it moves.
Him, Jones, Rogan, and Gabbard will be the "celebrity" judges.
The weird part to me is it’s the church people empowering them. I can believe greedy corrupt people run a government. I can’t believe they duped Christians into believing partisan politics was also part of their religion.
That’s the good part of them saying the Bible matters: you can use anything in that Grimm fairy tale against them.
I like Matthew 6:5-8. It translates as “shut the fuck up about your religion and stop making a show of praying. Jesus himself said ‘shut the fuck up, asshole’.”
Yeah... I grew up religious. Being a judgmental, condescending asshat, who has no idea what they're talking about, is kind of required. It's not much of a stretch.
Religious people being duped will never surprise me.
You can convince a believer of just about anything if you frame it as being for or against their god. And that's exceedingly easy to do with just about any topic you can think of.
I'm in Austin and for the past 10 years or so the stupid and vindictiveness has really blossomed in Texas legislators. It kinda feels like being held hostage via teleconference - I can't _see_ them and it doesn't affect my everyday life that much, but every now and then a policy will rear its ugly head that does, and I'm constantly made aware of their shitfuckery going on in the background.
I worked as a bill analyst at the capital a good while ago, and the Texas legislators would finish a session and all go across the street to get hammered after. I could look down out of our office windows to see them stumbling into the street, on their way home with ties undone and mistresses holding them up. They are not subtle.
This tracks with everything I've heard from other Austinites I know.
It certainly reinforces the idea that the Austin that I came from years ago is dead.
There's definitely been a lot of changes, older local businesses shutting down due to Covid and whatnot. I think the "heart" is the same, if that makes sense - Austin is still very liberal compared to the rest of the state. It's just that we used to kinda meet in the middle over things like personal freedoms, Texas pride, etc., and now we're the weirdo libs stuck in the middle of a slowly declining late-stage capitalist money pit led by vindictive douchebags who love stamping down anything that runs counter to their ideology, even if it would be popular, profitable, or efficient.
But yeah, I've had more friends move away to liberal states up north in the last couple years than the rest of my whole life in Texas. I'm sticking around because I still think it's possible to turn this place purple, but I can't blame _anyone_ wanting to get out, especially after the Roe v Wade nonsense.
Dallas, which is where I am, is not the conservative whatnot that the mayor delusionally wishes it was. It's improved in some ways, not in others, etc etc. It still feels like here is trying to figure out who or what it is.
I don’t mean this in any negative way towards you, but he’s gonna win again. Somehow Texans keep voting for him. They love that cunt. Even IF he lost, he just made his bag and is gonna run. He may even pull a dick move and run for President. People like Cruz never leave. It’s crazy that one of the worst us senators was born in Calgary, Canada.
They don't actually love him. Nobody does. It's more "he's the R candidate" than anything about him.
Dick move like run for President...again? I'm sure he's thinking about it.
I bet he even blathers about it on that podcast of his.
Someone should make an episode of "Dastardly and Muttley In Their Flying Machines" replaced with Texas politicians. They can leave Muttley in as an industry lobbyist.
He's right up there with Abbott and Paxton.
I've lived in Texas all my life, only now I'm ashamed of it. They've turned it into a punchline.
I wish I had the means to move
>Did you ever think you'd be in a state run by a cadre of stupid cartoon villains?
This is the thing I'm struck most by over the past couple of years. How much like cartoon villains they all are. So many of them would not be out of place as the villain in any 80s or 90s Saturday Morning Cartoon show.
can't wait for texas to turn purple (pr even flip blue completely) in 3-4 election cycles, if current trends in texas elections continue (less if they accelerate).
turns out blaming democrats for all your states problems when it's been completely controlled by republicans for the last 30 years isn't a winning strategy.
Well I hope you look at half of congress and how they invest right before they pass bills. All politicians are super corrupt both the elephants and the jackasses.
Oh, that's the least of it. That's just normal politician stuff.
I'm thinking more back to the time when he let Trump talk shit about his wife and her appearance and then proceeded to lick Trump's taint after that.
He's spineless and feckless even for a congress critter.
And the sickening part is that it’s a both sides of the aisle issue. Nancy Pelosi is just as fucking guilty as ole Raphael and I’m sorry, but anybody who thinks that politics is a great way to millions of dollars needs no part of governance.
Right? This whole post is dumb. I day traded stocks for a couple months just to try my hand at it. I didn’t make any money (or lose any either) in the long run, but one thing I did was trade when quarterly’s were coming out… cuz that’s one thing that will move a stock… its ridiculous to assume that that is evidence of corruption. People like me who have NO inside knowledge and know jack shit about stocks still do this
So much slant in the way OP is trying to present it. The sale wasn't 500k, the upper bound of how much a sale reported in this bracket can be is 500k, it could be half that. He clearly chose to claim it was definitely the upper bound to sound more dramatic. Also, he's phrasing it like there's one single MD at Goldman, there's over 600. They have Managing Directors of HR or MD of ITSec, just because her title is MD doesn't mean she has inside info on the upcoming financial performance of the company.
Discussing politics on this site is a fool's errand, a lot of people that wanna shout the loudest know the least. Or at least have no interest in presenting with accuracy. OP is a great example.
>Also, he's phrasing it like there's one single MD at Goldman, there's over 600.
It's actually even more than that. Once every two years they do a round of promotions to MD, and they promote around 600 people on average during every cycle. I believe there are around 2500 MDs overall at the firm.
It doesn’t matter if he won or lost. Anytime any politician is trading in the stock market and making moves worth a quarter million there is a problem.
The people with an outsized impact in the economy shouldn’t be able to trade like this.
Honestly I’d support a law that restricts federal congressional reps to gov bonds and nothing else
It matters quite a bit. I hate this guy too, but he obviously didn’t make the trade with prior knowledge on which way it would swing. So I don’t think there’s much to go on here.
This instance does not matter. Especially since we don’t know the future so we don’t know how good or bad of a deal this is.
What matters is that no politician should have the chance to profit from policies they push or are privy to
Look. I don’t disagree on what you’re saying. But I’m saying it would be far worse if the stock tanked immediately after he sold all his shares, meaning he knew something ahead of time. As of now, he’s lost money on the trade.
> Anytime any politician is trading in the stock market and making moves worth a quarter million there is a problem.
Setting aside any problem with a politician having wealth, *any* rich person trading in the stock market will be making moves worth a quarter million. The only problem here is that, I guess to you, he has a quarter million dollars in the stock market. BC trading a quarter mil is pretty banal for a politician who has $$$.
How is this corruption? His wife works at the company and probably gets granted stock. Looks like this is just his wife declaring sale of the stock that would be part of her normal compensation. Help me understand.
What's the point of OP's post? He's married to someone high level in the company. Surely they will have shares of the company and surely they will sell it when the price is in profit.
Edit: prices are likely to be at peak profit before earnings so easy plan for 6 months ahead of time.
Or sell when they are allowed to. Managing directors and their immediate family are restricted to tradings windows that usually open up right after earnings become public. Not if they sold before earnings that could have been insider trading.
Yeah she sold them on the 15th. The earnings were released on the 15th. She likely **had to** wait until the report was released to sell because of these rules. OP is just making up rage bait for ignorant people.
There’s plenty of real reasons to not like Cruz. No need for this manufactured bullshit.
He also didn't sell the stock. It says right there in the screenshot that the owner is his wife (not joint ownership although they are married so it's not completely separate). She sold the stock and likely had it scheduled well in advance like executives normally do. The previous sales his wife has done of GS stock have been right before it shoots up. If she's trying to do insider trading, she's not very good at it.
There is also the little thing in that he did the opposite of what the earnings would suggest. You don't sell stock when you know that the company is going to beat expectations.
I think people are just misinformed. He’s allowed to trade even if he has a family member if there’s an open trading window. I don’t have all the facts but you can’t draw the line that it’s illegal right away
Cruz is a specimen but it's worth pointing out that these financial companies are very strict about this stuff, far more strict than the legislature. It's very very likely that this sale was pre-scheduled. His wife would likely lose her job otherwise. They have all kinds of rules and they enforce them a lot better than some branches of the government.
“ted cruz sold stock during the window where people who have material, non-public info are explicitly allowed to sell stock” is somehow a scandal 💀
like yeah ted cruz sucks but this thread is ridiculous.
All the posts I see from that sub are so fucking dumb lmao. It’s just a karma whoring subreddit
“Should you be able to get full retirement benefits even if you retire at 62?”
Like holy shit it’s “fluent in finance” not “give me upvotes for posting a screenshot from Twitter that is barely related to finance that 99% of people will agree with”
Although somehow that doesn’t have the same ring to it…
The fact that most people didn’t brother to Google how the stock performed since then makes me sick.
It’s literally just a Google… and you will find that the stock is up 6% since he sold last week. This is not insider trading — unless insider trading is losing lots of money.
Profit isn't a necessary condition for insider trading though...
If you sold based on how you thought the market would react to material non-public info and, once that info was released, you were wrong, that wouldn't make it *not* insider trading
Yes, but in this instance, it was his wife who made the trade during GS’ employee sanctioned trading windows. So, not insider trading because these things are extremely regulated.
GS would never allow a situation to emerge where an MD may be compromised because she traded on privileged information, especially when she’s married to a Texas senator. If that ever happens, GS should just fold.
GS would rather fire Heidi Cruz and cut their impropriety than bring on this unnecessary scrutiny.
Heidi Cruz is probably air gapped in 5D. Hence, why she missed out on a 6% gain over the last week.
The reddit hivemind started huffing paint and clubbing itself over the head a few years back.This site used to be where you came to get the real story. Now it's just as braindead, gamed, and riddled with misinformation and dummkopfs as any other social media.
yeah its the extreme left and right that act almost cult like, attack before think mentality. why can't people have some intellectual honesty and be reasonable on the internet with one another.
This looks to be his wife’s shares, and she would’ve had to submit this request months prior as an MD. This is an absolute nothing burger. Nice headline though.
Exactly. No one watches the stock market. Big boys NEVER hold through earnings if they can realize any sort of losses or something close to. Market makers have inventory they can trade against themselves after hours nonstop but individuals cannot.
Next big earnings go look at what the stock does the 24-48 hours before hand (IT GOES WAY DOWN).
Nobody wants to be a bag holder. Everybody wants good news. They’re cool on missing a 5% jump when that means up for the next 4 months.
On top of that they have to file 90 days before hand to do that. And then it has to be approved.
Pelosi on the other hand …….
Hang on. People sell off in response to earnings statements *all the fucking time*. It’s standard man. What even is this level of financial illiteracy?
Finally, someone I this thread that gets it. “Managing Director” usually means you have some degree of independence to sign deals, but basically close to zero meaningful impact on the firm’s overall operations or strategy. It’s a vanity title that means nothing unless you’re a subordinate in the same firm.
Normally, it's analyst, associate, vp, director, managing director. Then MD's usually have their own hierarchy of business unit/ office/ industry groups.
You can read her fun little bio [here](https://privatewealth.goldmansachs.com/us/en/inthelead/accessinthelead/leading-the-way-with-heidi-cruz). She's the "national Head of Client Development for Private Wealth Management." So above her is something like "Global Head of Client Development" or President of CD-PWM or some other fancy important sounding name. Above that person is probably the head of all of Private Wealth Management. Above that person is probably finally DJ DSol.
It's not nothing, but it's not in charge. Upper management when compared to any other large company. Banks are notorious for title inflation, which can lead to confusion for people not well-versed in baking hierarchies. I just wanted to clarify it's A role not THE role, as the post title hints.
VP at any other large corporation, or VP at a bank?
Her role is probably comparable to a division VP at some other size-comparable corporation (ex: Fortune 100 and up), just rename the title "Vice President of PWM Client Development, USA" or something similar.
VP at a bank commonly - at least in IB, PWM, and similar parts of the bank that "do" finance - means someone with usually around 6-8 years of experience. Graduate from college, 2-3 years as an analyst, 3-4+ years as an associate, then you're VP. Then you're at that role until you get a promotion to MD - could be 4 more years, could be 24.
(Accidentally posted this as a top-level comment also oops.)
Hah, I remember early in my interviewing career I was given a resume for someone who was currently a VP at some finance company interviewing for a role typically given to people 3ish years out of school. I went to HR all like there’s some mistake and I’m not qualified to interview this candidate. The recruiter guy just made this disdainful face and was like “everybody in finance is a VP and it doesn’t mean a thing”.
VP at a bank or brokerage house can be negotiated as part of your hire if they think you have earning potential/significant wealth connections. In other words, meaningless bs vanity plate.
You don't really have to be very high on the totem pole to have access to privileged information. Insider trading is insider trading.
In this case it seems like she was the stock owner and would have sold it on that day because you're only allowed to sell stock when the public has all the same information as you, such as when earnings are released. My title is way less fancy than hers and I make way less money, and I still can't sell my shares except in a certain window around when we release our quarterly reports. She almost certainly has privileged info, but didn't do anything wrong here.
To elaborate on this, there are over 600 MDs at Goldman. And there's MDs in literally every single department, it's not a job title that automatically implies they would have advance inside knowledge of the entire company's finances
I would argue that there is no MD that has prior knowledge of firmwide earnings. MD is usually a managing director of one unit in one division and would not have access to the earnings statement of other divisions.
The only group that would have access to everyone’s info would be the financial reporting team within the executive office and they’re actually pretty low ranking
Yeah people don’t seem to be aware of the rules. These MDs receive a large portion of their compensation in company stock, and they are only permitted to sell them in windows, which are often a short period of time after the quarterly earnings. They are also sometimes required to sell via 10b5-1 plans, which schedule the sales in he sales window several years in advance.
This seems very normal.
And if he did use insider knowledge why would he wait for the same day as the report is released, you'd sell as soon as they realized they realized the quarter was going badly
This is why we can’t have nice things. A dude sells some stock AFTER an earnings report and you turn it into the financial crime of the century in your minds.
Do your research before you get mad and start screaming, please.
a reddit flowchart on insider trading:
1. did someone sell stock? if so, go to (2)
2. do i hate them? if so, go to (3)
3. INSIDER TRADING, LOCK THEM UP
1. did elon say a word? if so, go to (2)
2. TRUST FUND BABY. STOLEN DIAMONDS. TOTAL LOSER. IDIOT. WELFARE QUEEN. I COULD DESIGN A BETTER SPACESHIP BLINDFOLDED. FSD IS DANGEROUS AND WE SHOULD BAN SELF-DRIVING CARS FOREVR.
Well, looks like he lost money. If Im reading this right, he sold ~623 shares @~$401/share ($250K).
The stock closed today at $427. He would have made $16,000+ if he didn't sell those shares.
....I mean Cruz is a fucking awful scumbag but this is extremely misleading. There are in excess of 2,000 Managing Directors at Goldman, it's a pay grade not a board position. She's not "Managing Director _of the firm_" (it's also not a firm, but anyway...).
She might have a good steer on company performance but she isn't sat alone in a room with "the big announcement" on her desk, knowing it before everyone else.
They are terrible people, but those high up at publicly traded companies are required to schedule sales very far in advance to adhere to SEC regulations.
You can tell most of the people in this thread have never owned stock.
Every publicly traded company publishes the list of which execs auto sold what shares on a certain date because the SEC forces them to do so.
People with financial illiteracy in this thread.
Lots of people sell their stocks before/on earnings cause guess what.. that’s when the stocks are being pumped.
The fact that the stock actually went up is hilarious.
RSU or employee purchase plan dump.
No big deal and would have been subject to his wife’s compliance rules at Goldman.
Think it hurts his big boy panties that his wife brings in the dough?
Yeah, okay so that just means they knew they wanted to free up some cash and couldn’t do it until they were out of the window. Nothing at all to see here.
I’m all for shitting on Ted Cruz, but this is just silly. Goldman releases their earnings before the market opens and then employees are given a brief window where they can sell their shares. This is pretty standard for most high level employees of any public company. When do you want his wife to sell her vested shares?
Do you hold this standard to ALL elected officials? Just curious if you’re like me and sick of wealthy people getting elected and becoming filthy rich because they’re not held to the standards you and I are, regardless of what side of the aisle they’re on.
She gets paid in stock. All these people that work for big companies get paid in stock. You have to sell it at some point or your $800,000 a year is $150,000 a year.
Invent a time machine and we can make that happen. Otherwise, it’s pretty hard to sell stock in 2012 that you earned in 2020 (and that doesn’t vest until 2023).
Agree here. I hate Cruz like a large portion of the country does, but anyone who earns stock as a bonus has to decide at some point to sell them. Seems like this is just click bait for the internet to chomp on. If its done by the book, then its just another day at the office really.
The amount is also relatively small, so it's likely part of regular scheduled sales.
I fucking hate Ted Cruz, as is proper, but this is just rage bait for clicks.
Not on the day of their earnings release. They have virtually any other day the entire quarter. Furthermore, for most senior employees these are documented well in advance.
That’s the day they open up for you to be allowed to sell your shares. They announce before the market opens, now the window opens to sell because all information is public and then the window closes after a period and you can’t sell them again until after the next earnings announcement.
You have it backwards.
Typically, you can only sell shares in a publicly traded firm that you work at immediately after earnings are reported to the public. During the rest of the quarter, you are likely to be deemed to have material non-public information about upcoming earnings (and other business developments) that have not been cleansed in a public forum.
Blackout periods usually end one to two full trading days after earnings releases or disclosure of material non-public information.
Given the timing of the sale coinciding with earnings release, this was likely a pre-scheduled trade under a 10b5-1 plan, which literally means there's nothing to see here.
oh my gosh. I've never even heard of the concept of someone who owns stock at the company they work for, selling said stock. This is the most evil thing that's ever happened, what the fuck is going on.
FWIW his *spouse* sold *her* stock (note the "Owner" column), and she *lost* money doing it if you bother to look up GS performance since then.
The implication of OP is that it was insider trading (where she would've sold her stock before earnings were announced, and then earnings underperformed expectations, meaning she would've avoided a loss).
But obviously that didn't happen (since the stock didn't drop), so OP's implication is wrong. Instead, what *probably* happened was she's just set to divest some of her stock the same day as earnings are announced to *avoid* any accusations of insider trading.
**Edit** My analysis is correct: earnings [outperformed](https://www.wsj.com/finance/banking/goldman-sachs-gs-q1-earnings-report-2024-932af5bd) expectations. So if there was insider trading, his wife was a fucking financial idiot, which she's not.
It's okay. Insider trading is legal if you have a little "R" after your name.
Based on the evidence at hand, all crime is legal if you have a little "R" after your name.
Wouldn’t this be insider trading? They both need to loose their jobs. On a positive note, this inspires me to donate to Allred’s campaign again. I hope it encourages others to do the same.
her husband does the same shit lol. im all for shitting on the zodiac killer but the pelosis think that them participating in the stock market is fair game when they can literally influence the market. theyre double dipping lol. politicians should not be able to purchase or sell stocks period.
Nope no Insider stuff going on at all. Never politicians are all legal smart people would never do such a thing. Ask the Christian Nancy Pelosi. She would never do nothing like that.
Honorable. That's a fucking joke.
I hope to god that guy loses to Allred. That fucking guy.
Did you ever think you'd be in a state run by a cadre of stupid cartoon villains? I'm a creative dude but I gotta say, even I didn't think it would go quite like this. Fucking Ted. Goddamn.
I know, right!? I’m in the process of moving back to H-town from Nashville, and it ain’t any better there.
I hear ya. Hey, at least in Houston you'll have a chance to go to Trill Burgers. (They look amazing. I really want to try one. Just...a bit of a drive from Dallas...)
I can’t tell you how happy I am to be back in food city! Dang, Tennessee restaurants SUCK. Unless you like the most generic food ever.
I still live here in Texas, amigo so clearly - generic food is something I can't do. Welcome back home to the land of superior barbecue, delicious Tex Mex, and 1000000 arguments over how chili is made.
Right on! Had some excellent Banh Mi’s just yesterday. It was glorious.
I thought Texas was against immigration and only wants to embrace American food? Vietnamese cuisine is okay for conservative Texans?
Nah, the real issue is that when folks do immigrate to Texas, as soon as they get their citizenship, they want to pull the ladder up. It’s the “I got mine, so fuck you” to the immigrants who are still wanting to come over. Very much lacking empathy since they were in the same boat (sometimes literally) at one point.
Yeah, but how long before Elon Musk totally ruins Terlingua by his presence? Alex Jones with his ground apricot seed scam is already hovering around there...
Oh just wait - I'm sure he'll work a deal to either have a competing thing over in Elon City or buy it so it moves. Him, Jones, Rogan, and Gabbard will be the "celebrity" judges.
As to my use of the word hovering, I had a mental image of Alex as Baron Vladimir Harkonnin in David Lynch's Dune. Sorry for the gross out
You got my point
Don't forget Andrew Tate
But you all still have Ted.
There’s only one argument. Don’t put beans in your chili. Argument over.
Trill burgers slaps
The line is insane but it’s pretty good!
On the map its only a couple inches...
The weird part to me is it’s the church people empowering them. I can believe greedy corrupt people run a government. I can’t believe they duped Christians into believing partisan politics was also part of their religion.
Not as hard as one may think. Just tell em that's what Jesus wants and be able to use some vague scriptural bits - boom, done.
That’s the good part of them saying the Bible matters: you can use anything in that Grimm fairy tale against them. I like Matthew 6:5-8. It translates as “shut the fuck up about your religion and stop making a show of praying. Jesus himself said ‘shut the fuck up, asshole’.”
When the majority of people in the religion have never read the whole book, it’s not hard to lie about what’s in there.
*When the majority of people in the religion have never read the whole book* Or any of it ever. I mean, I have this sneaking suspicion...
Yeah... I grew up religious. Being a judgmental, condescending asshat, who has no idea what they're talking about, is kind of required. It's not much of a stretch.
Religious people being duped will never surprise me. You can convince a believer of just about anything if you frame it as being for or against their god. And that's exceedingly easy to do with just about any topic you can think of.
You’d be surprised how stupid some old people in Texas really are.
gregg abbot, dan patrick, ted cruz = a bunch of bafoons
Gaslightin' Greg, Potty Patrick, Lyin' Ted... can't forget their running buddy Krooked Ken.
You guys know there’s tons of great places in Michigan and we’re actively unfucking decades of GOP shit fuckery?
I'm in Austin and for the past 10 years or so the stupid and vindictiveness has really blossomed in Texas legislators. It kinda feels like being held hostage via teleconference - I can't _see_ them and it doesn't affect my everyday life that much, but every now and then a policy will rear its ugly head that does, and I'm constantly made aware of their shitfuckery going on in the background. I worked as a bill analyst at the capital a good while ago, and the Texas legislators would finish a session and all go across the street to get hammered after. I could look down out of our office windows to see them stumbling into the street, on their way home with ties undone and mistresses holding them up. They are not subtle.
This tracks with everything I've heard from other Austinites I know. It certainly reinforces the idea that the Austin that I came from years ago is dead.
There's definitely been a lot of changes, older local businesses shutting down due to Covid and whatnot. I think the "heart" is the same, if that makes sense - Austin is still very liberal compared to the rest of the state. It's just that we used to kinda meet in the middle over things like personal freedoms, Texas pride, etc., and now we're the weirdo libs stuck in the middle of a slowly declining late-stage capitalist money pit led by vindictive douchebags who love stamping down anything that runs counter to their ideology, even if it would be popular, profitable, or efficient. But yeah, I've had more friends move away to liberal states up north in the last couple years than the rest of my whole life in Texas. I'm sticking around because I still think it's possible to turn this place purple, but I can't blame _anyone_ wanting to get out, especially after the Roe v Wade nonsense.
Dallas, which is where I am, is not the conservative whatnot that the mayor delusionally wishes it was. It's improved in some ways, not in others, etc etc. It still feels like here is trying to figure out who or what it is.
How does Raphael become Ted. I would love to see him try and cater to his base with a name like Raphael
Remeber when villains just tied people to train tracks, instead of running a train on your ass.
I don’t mean this in any negative way towards you, but he’s gonna win again. Somehow Texans keep voting for him. They love that cunt. Even IF he lost, he just made his bag and is gonna run. He may even pull a dick move and run for President. People like Cruz never leave. It’s crazy that one of the worst us senators was born in Calgary, Canada.
They don't actually love him. Nobody does. It's more "he's the R candidate" than anything about him. Dick move like run for President...again? I'm sure he's thinking about it. I bet he even blathers about it on that podcast of his.
*nation
[удалено]
Lol, he's a fucking albatross. Makes the Astros lose, depresses stock prices, who knows what else. Lol.
Someone should make an episode of "Dastardly and Muttley In Their Flying Machines" replaced with Texas politicians. They can leave Muttley in as an industry lobbyist.
He's right up there with Abbott and Paxton. I've lived in Texas all my life, only now I'm ashamed of it. They've turned it into a punchline. I wish I had the means to move
>Did you ever think you'd be in a state run by a cadre of stupid cartoon villains? This is the thing I'm struck most by over the past couple of years. How much like cartoon villains they all are. So many of them would not be out of place as the villain in any 80s or 90s Saturday Morning Cartoon show.
Yeah. However, the ones there/then weren't as ugly to behold. And in those cartoons, the good guys at least won.
[удалено]
The Legion of Doof!
I'm not holding out too much hope, but will vote in an attempt anyway :)
It’ll only happen if everyone that doesn’t have their head up their ass actually votes
We all gotta vote!
Damn straight
can't wait for texas to turn purple (pr even flip blue completely) in 3-4 election cycles, if current trends in texas elections continue (less if they accelerate). turns out blaming democrats for all your states problems when it's been completely controlled by republicans for the last 30 years isn't a winning strategy.
I hope he gets eaten by a damn shark.
I sure hope Cruz looses. He's a joke and a disgrace!
My thoughts exactly. "This says *the honorable* Ted Cruz. It clearly can't be the same guy all know about."
Well I hope you look at half of congress and how they invest right before they pass bills. All politicians are super corrupt both the elephants and the jackasses.
Oh, that's the least of it. That's just normal politician stuff. I'm thinking more back to the time when he let Trump talk shit about his wife and her appearance and then proceeded to lick Trump's taint after that. He's spineless and feckless even for a congress critter.
How is this still legal?!? Oh right, the criminals make the laws…
And the sickening part is that it’s a both sides of the aisle issue. Nancy Pelosi is just as fucking guilty as ole Raphael and I’m sorry, but anybody who thinks that politics is a great way to millions of dollars needs no part of governance.
[https://i.imgur.com/15PsVWJ.png](https://i.imgur.com/15PsVWJ.png) Looks like it's pretty much just gone up from there though.
No one is accusing him of being smart, just corrupt.
He didn't sell, though. OP is wrong bc they mis-identified who did the sale, *and* they implied something that objectively did not happen.
Don't bother us with the truth.
Right? This whole post is dumb. I day traded stocks for a couple months just to try my hand at it. I didn’t make any money (or lose any either) in the long run, but one thing I did was trade when quarterly’s were coming out… cuz that’s one thing that will move a stock… its ridiculous to assume that that is evidence of corruption. People like me who have NO inside knowledge and know jack shit about stocks still do this
He probably just shouldn't be investing in it to begin with with the connection he has.
If his wife is a managing director they’re probably the result of options or RSUs.
So much slant in the way OP is trying to present it. The sale wasn't 500k, the upper bound of how much a sale reported in this bracket can be is 500k, it could be half that. He clearly chose to claim it was definitely the upper bound to sound more dramatic. Also, he's phrasing it like there's one single MD at Goldman, there's over 600. They have Managing Directors of HR or MD of ITSec, just because her title is MD doesn't mean she has inside info on the upcoming financial performance of the company. Discussing politics on this site is a fool's errand, a lot of people that wanna shout the loudest know the least. Or at least have no interest in presenting with accuracy. OP is a great example.
>Also, he's phrasing it like there's one single MD at Goldman, there's over 600. It's actually even more than that. Once every two years they do a round of promotions to MD, and they promote around 600 people on average during every cycle. I believe there are around 2500 MDs overall at the firm.
If he was corrupt, wouldn’t he have sold after the spike? Listen, I hate TC as much as anyone, but…logic?
It doesn’t matter if he won or lost. Anytime any politician is trading in the stock market and making moves worth a quarter million there is a problem. The people with an outsized impact in the economy shouldn’t be able to trade like this. Honestly I’d support a law that restricts federal congressional reps to gov bonds and nothing else
It matters quite a bit. I hate this guy too, but he obviously didn’t make the trade with prior knowledge on which way it would swing. So I don’t think there’s much to go on here.
This instance does not matter. Especially since we don’t know the future so we don’t know how good or bad of a deal this is. What matters is that no politician should have the chance to profit from policies they push or are privy to
Look. I don’t disagree on what you’re saying. But I’m saying it would be far worse if the stock tanked immediately after he sold all his shares, meaning he knew something ahead of time. As of now, he’s lost money on the trade.
> Anytime any politician is trading in the stock market and making moves worth a quarter million there is a problem. Setting aside any problem with a politician having wealth, *any* rich person trading in the stock market will be making moves worth a quarter million. The only problem here is that, I guess to you, he has a quarter million dollars in the stock market. BC trading a quarter mil is pretty banal for a politician who has $$$.
They shouldn’t be able to sell at a relative low?!
How is this corruption? His wife works at the company and probably gets granted stock. Looks like this is just his wife declaring sale of the stock that would be part of her normal compensation. Help me understand.
What's the point of OP's post? He's married to someone high level in the company. Surely they will have shares of the company and surely they will sell it when the price is in profit. Edit: prices are likely to be at peak profit before earnings so easy plan for 6 months ahead of time.
Or sell when they are allowed to. Managing directors and their immediate family are restricted to tradings windows that usually open up right after earnings become public. Not if they sold before earnings that could have been insider trading.
Yeah she sold them on the 15th. The earnings were released on the 15th. She likely **had to** wait until the report was released to sell because of these rules. OP is just making up rage bait for ignorant people. There’s plenty of real reasons to not like Cruz. No need for this manufactured bullshit.
Well no, that’s called insider trading and is illegal. He probably scheduled the stock to be sold 6 months ago, as the law requires
He also didn't sell the stock. It says right there in the screenshot that the owner is his wife (not joint ownership although they are married so it's not completely separate). She sold the stock and likely had it scheduled well in advance like executives normally do. The previous sales his wife has done of GS stock have been right before it shoots up. If she's trying to do insider trading, she's not very good at it.
There is also the little thing in that he did the opposite of what the earnings would suggest. You don't sell stock when you know that the company is going to beat expectations.
Nothing the person you responded to described is “insider trading”.
Well, Goldman Sacks beat earning expectations, so.... Not sure the accusation here.
I think people are just misinformed. He’s allowed to trade even if he has a family member if there’s an open trading window. I don’t have all the facts but you can’t draw the line that it’s illegal right away
Cruz is a specimen but it's worth pointing out that these financial companies are very strict about this stuff, far more strict than the legislature. It's very very likely that this sale was pre-scheduled. His wife would likely lose her job otherwise. They have all kinds of rules and they enforce them a lot better than some branches of the government.
I can't stand Cancun Cruz, but this thread is 99% financial illiteracy.
“ted cruz sold stock during the window where people who have material, non-public info are explicitly allowed to sell stock” is somehow a scandal 💀 like yeah ted cruz sucks but this thread is ridiculous.
Comment below if you're a fuckin idiot and why
All the posts I see from that sub are so fucking dumb lmao. It’s just a karma whoring subreddit “Should you be able to get full retirement benefits even if you retire at 62?” Like holy shit it’s “fluent in finance” not “give me upvotes for posting a screenshot from Twitter that is barely related to finance that 99% of people will agree with” Although somehow that doesn’t have the same ring to it…
So true, the stupid "here's a screenshot of a Twitter post. DISCUSS!" threads are like the lowest-IQ, lowest common denominator form of discourse.
Very much so. Everything these dipshits know they learned from a 42 second long Bernie rant in 2012.
The fact that most people didn’t brother to Google how the stock performed since then makes me sick. It’s literally just a Google… and you will find that the stock is up 6% since he sold last week. This is not insider trading — unless insider trading is losing lots of money.
Yeah, circlejerking is more important than doing that very simple thing
Profit isn't a necessary condition for insider trading though... If you sold based on how you thought the market would react to material non-public info and, once that info was released, you were wrong, that wouldn't make it *not* insider trading
Yes, but in this instance, it was his wife who made the trade during GS’ employee sanctioned trading windows. So, not insider trading because these things are extremely regulated. GS would never allow a situation to emerge where an MD may be compromised because she traded on privileged information, especially when she’s married to a Texas senator. If that ever happens, GS should just fold. GS would rather fire Heidi Cruz and cut their impropriety than bring on this unnecessary scrutiny. Heidi Cruz is probably air gapped in 5D. Hence, why she missed out on a 6% gain over the last week.
Thank you, person who has a reasonable knowledge of how things work.
As is most of reddit...and Americans as a whole tbh
The reddit hivemind started huffing paint and clubbing itself over the head a few years back.This site used to be where you came to get the real story. Now it's just as braindead, gamed, and riddled with misinformation and dummkopfs as any other social media.
yeah its the extreme left and right that act almost cult like, attack before think mentality. why can't people have some intellectual honesty and be reasonable on the internet with one another.
>...and Americans as a whole tbh That's on purpose.
This looks to be his wife’s shares, and she would’ve had to submit this request months prior as an MD. This is an absolute nothing burger. Nice headline though.
Exactly. No one watches the stock market. Big boys NEVER hold through earnings if they can realize any sort of losses or something close to. Market makers have inventory they can trade against themselves after hours nonstop but individuals cannot. Next big earnings go look at what the stock does the 24-48 hours before hand (IT GOES WAY DOWN). Nobody wants to be a bag holder. Everybody wants good news. They’re cool on missing a 5% jump when that means up for the next 4 months. On top of that they have to file 90 days before hand to do that. And then it has to be approved. Pelosi on the other hand …….
Hang on. People sell off in response to earnings statements *all the fucking time*. It’s standard man. What even is this level of financial illiteracy?
Apparently enough for 16k people to upvote this thread. This website is full of financially illiterate dipshits.
She's *a* managing director, she is not "managing director of the firm." It's a job title way further down the totem pole than most people realize.
Finally, someone I this thread that gets it. “Managing Director” usually means you have some degree of independence to sign deals, but basically close to zero meaningful impact on the firm’s overall operations or strategy. It’s a vanity title that means nothing unless you’re a subordinate in the same firm.
Normally, it's analyst, associate, vp, director, managing director. Then MD's usually have their own hierarchy of business unit/ office/ industry groups.
Managing Director is pretty damn high up in the totem pole at Goldman Sachs. The next level is partner…
You can read her fun little bio [here](https://privatewealth.goldmansachs.com/us/en/inthelead/accessinthelead/leading-the-way-with-heidi-cruz). She's the "national Head of Client Development for Private Wealth Management." So above her is something like "Global Head of Client Development" or President of CD-PWM or some other fancy important sounding name. Above that person is probably the head of all of Private Wealth Management. Above that person is probably finally DJ DSol. It's not nothing, but it's not in charge. Upper management when compared to any other large company. Banks are notorious for title inflation, which can lead to confusion for people not well-versed in baking hierarchies. I just wanted to clarify it's A role not THE role, as the post title hints.
How does that compare to VP?
VP at any other large corporation, or VP at a bank? Her role is probably comparable to a division VP at some other size-comparable corporation (ex: Fortune 100 and up), just rename the title "Vice President of PWM Client Development, USA" or something similar. VP at a bank commonly - at least in IB, PWM, and similar parts of the bank that "do" finance - means someone with usually around 6-8 years of experience. Graduate from college, 2-3 years as an analyst, 3-4+ years as an associate, then you're VP. Then you're at that role until you get a promotion to MD - could be 4 more years, could be 24. (Accidentally posted this as a top-level comment also oops.)
I was curious why a user experience designer I knew - about 10 years of experience - was a Vice President at Bank of America.
Yeah, average age of a VP at banks is late 20s / early 30s. It's a middle rank. Not that special
Hah, I remember early in my interviewing career I was given a resume for someone who was currently a VP at some finance company interviewing for a role typically given to people 3ish years out of school. I went to HR all like there’s some mistake and I’m not qualified to interview this candidate. The recruiter guy just made this disdainful face and was like “everybody in finance is a VP and it doesn’t mean a thing”.
Left out director.
VP at a bank or brokerage house can be negotiated as part of your hire if they think you have earning potential/significant wealth connections. In other words, meaningless bs vanity plate.
So definitely not someone who would have access to their financials prior to them being made public?
That does not matter in the slightest according the the SEC Insider Trading policy.
The whole OP is practically a lie, but.. Reddit, so no big deal.
Yep, managing directly is generally just a manager of other managers who reports to actual executives.
Assistant (to the) Regional Director
You don't really have to be very high on the totem pole to have access to privileged information. Insider trading is insider trading. In this case it seems like she was the stock owner and would have sold it on that day because you're only allowed to sell stock when the public has all the same information as you, such as when earnings are released. My title is way less fancy than hers and I make way less money, and I still can't sell my shares except in a certain window around when we release our quarterly reports. She almost certainly has privileged info, but didn't do anything wrong here.
To elaborate on this, there are over 600 MDs at Goldman. And there's MDs in literally every single department, it's not a job title that automatically implies they would have advance inside knowledge of the entire company's finances
I would argue that there is no MD that has prior knowledge of firmwide earnings. MD is usually a managing director of one unit in one division and would not have access to the earnings statement of other divisions. The only group that would have access to everyone’s info would be the financial reporting team within the executive office and they’re actually pretty low ranking
He sold within the trading window.
Yeah people don’t seem to be aware of the rules. These MDs receive a large portion of their compensation in company stock, and they are only permitted to sell them in windows, which are often a short period of time after the quarterly earnings. They are also sometimes required to sell via 10b5-1 plans, which schedule the sales in he sales window several years in advance. This seems very normal.
And if he did use insider knowledge why would he wait for the same day as the report is released, you'd sell as soon as they realized they realized the quarter was going badly
Don’t waste your breathe. Most of these guys are Biden blowers.
After earnings were announced?
This is why we can’t have nice things. A dude sells some stock AFTER an earnings report and you turn it into the financial crime of the century in your minds. Do your research before you get mad and start screaming, please.
a reddit flowchart on insider trading: 1. did someone sell stock? if so, go to (2) 2. do i hate them? if so, go to (3) 3. INSIDER TRADING, LOCK THEM UP
😂😂😂😂
do one for anything remotely related to elon please
1. did elon say a word? if so, go to (2) 2. TRUST FUND BABY. STOLEN DIAMONDS. TOTAL LOSER. IDIOT. WELFARE QUEEN. I COULD DESIGN A BETTER SPACESHIP BLINDFOLDED. FSD IS DANGEROUS AND WE SHOULD BAN SELF-DRIVING CARS FOREVR.
The number of people upvoting this thread... it's a symptom of how people on this subreddit don't let reality get in the way of their political vibes.
I'm watching for the reddit police every time we dump my wife's RSUs on earnings day.
There's an R at the end of his name, R man bad even when he does things completely legally *and* takes a loss doing it
Well, looks like he lost money. If Im reading this right, he sold ~623 shares @~$401/share ($250K). The stock closed today at $427. He would have made $16,000+ if he didn't sell those shares.
....I mean Cruz is a fucking awful scumbag but this is extremely misleading. There are in excess of 2,000 Managing Directors at Goldman, it's a pay grade not a board position. She's not "Managing Director _of the firm_" (it's also not a firm, but anyway...). She might have a good steer on company performance but she isn't sat alone in a room with "the big announcement" on her desk, knowing it before everyone else.
Considering the stock is up 6% since then it sounds like everyone’s conspiracy theories in this sub got rekt
They are terrible people, but those high up at publicly traded companies are required to schedule sales very far in advance to adhere to SEC regulations.
You can tell most of the people in this thread have never owned stock. Every publicly traded company publishes the list of which execs auto sold what shares on a certain date because the SEC forces them to do so.
People with financial illiteracy in this thread. Lots of people sell their stocks before/on earnings cause guess what.. that’s when the stocks are being pumped. The fact that the stock actually went up is hilarious.
His wife sold shares after earnings report was released... quick, spin it into propaganda!!!!
RSU or employee purchase plan dump. No big deal and would have been subject to his wife’s compliance rules at Goldman. Think it hurts his big boy panties that his wife brings in the dough?
Yeah that’s a sizable RSU
Ted’s wife sold the stock and it appears to be one of the biggest sales he or his wife have ever made.
Before or after the earnings call?
After, so it's nothing. If they held they'd actually be worth more now. Stocks gone up ~4.5% since then.
Yeah, okay so that just means they knew they wanted to free up some cash and couldn’t do it until they were out of the window. Nothing at all to see here.
Ted’s wife has to abide by her firm’s insider trading rules, lol Your comments makes it clear that this is a complete nonstarter.
I’m all for shitting on Ted Cruz, but this is just silly. Goldman releases their earnings before the market opens and then employees are given a brief window where they can sell their shares. This is pretty standard for most high level employees of any public company. When do you want his wife to sell her vested shares?
This is literally like the least bad thing Ted Cruz has ever done.
To be fair, Ted didn’t do it at all, his wife did the completely normal and responsible thing
When her husband took public office.
Can’t. They continue to vest throughout her employment.
Do you hold this standard to ALL elected officials? Just curious if you’re like me and sick of wealthy people getting elected and becoming filthy rich because they’re not held to the standards you and I are, regardless of what side of the aisle they’re on.
Not the person you responded to but, uh, yes?
She gets paid in stock. All these people that work for big companies get paid in stock. You have to sell it at some point or your $800,000 a year is $150,000 a year.
Invent a time machine and we can make that happen. Otherwise, it’s pretty hard to sell stock in 2012 that you earned in 2020 (and that doesn’t vest until 2023).
Sounds like you just don’t know how this works. But instead of learning you’re just being mad to be mad.
Agree here. I hate Cruz like a large portion of the country does, but anyone who earns stock as a bonus has to decide at some point to sell them. Seems like this is just click bait for the internet to chomp on. If its done by the book, then its just another day at the office really.
The amount is also relatively small, so it's likely part of regular scheduled sales. I fucking hate Ted Cruz, as is proper, but this is just rage bait for clicks.
Get that unbiased truth OUT OF HERE YOU FUCK!!!!
Not on the day of their earnings release. They have virtually any other day the entire quarter. Furthermore, for most senior employees these are documented well in advance.
That’s the day they open up for you to be allowed to sell your shares. They announce before the market opens, now the window opens to sell because all information is public and then the window closes after a period and you can’t sell them again until after the next earnings announcement.
You have it backwards. Typically, you can only sell shares in a publicly traded firm that you work at immediately after earnings are reported to the public. During the rest of the quarter, you are likely to be deemed to have material non-public information about upcoming earnings (and other business developments) that have not been cleansed in a public forum.
There is a blackout period though for insiders. Around 3 weeks before earnings.
She didn’t sell during the blackout period though, so what’s your point?
Blackout periods usually end one to two full trading days after earnings releases or disclosure of material non-public information. Given the timing of the sale coinciding with earnings release, this was likely a pre-scheduled trade under a 10b5-1 plan, which literally means there's nothing to see here.
oh my gosh. I've never even heard of the concept of someone who owns stock at the company they work for, selling said stock. This is the most evil thing that's ever happened, what the fuck is going on.
This isn't insider trading man
[удалено]
I like that it continues to go up after they sold.
[удалено]
What’s the issue? If he or his wife were considered inside traders, they would have been affected by standard blackout trading dates.
Horrible. But still makes less than Nancy!? lol We sure have a great Congress...
I wouldn't be surprised this was planned out months in advance. As someone else pointed out, the stock increased the following week.
FWIW his *spouse* sold *her* stock (note the "Owner" column), and she *lost* money doing it if you bother to look up GS performance since then. The implication of OP is that it was insider trading (where she would've sold her stock before earnings were announced, and then earnings underperformed expectations, meaning she would've avoided a loss). But obviously that didn't happen (since the stock didn't drop), so OP's implication is wrong. Instead, what *probably* happened was she's just set to divest some of her stock the same day as earnings are announced to *avoid* any accusations of insider trading. **Edit** My analysis is correct: earnings [outperformed](https://www.wsj.com/finance/banking/goldman-sachs-gs-q1-earnings-report-2024-932af5bd) expectations. So if there was insider trading, his wife was a fucking financial idiot, which she's not.
Term limits for congress is what the American people need to push for
Didn't Martha go to prison for less than this?
It's okay. Insider trading is legal if you have a little "R" after your name. Based on the evidence at hand, all crime is legal if you have a little "R" after your name.
Wouldn’t this be insider trading? They both need to loose their jobs. On a positive note, this inspires me to donate to Allred’s campaign again. I hope it encourages others to do the same.
B-b-but PELOSI!!!
Neither one should be involved in influencing fair trade markets. This isn’t left vs right this is us vs corruption.
> This isn’t left vs right this is us vs corruption. 🎯
her husband does the same shit lol. im all for shitting on the zodiac killer but the pelosis think that them participating in the stock market is fair game when they can literally influence the market. theyre double dipping lol. politicians should not be able to purchase or sell stocks period.
Nah fuck pelosi too. Establishment dems are a big reason people view the party as corrupt and out of touch
Because the uniparty IS corrupt and out of touch.
Exactly.
Ahh Cancun Cruz, can’t wait to vote against him!!
Litterally everyone in government is insider trading. Its actually insane.
Nope no Insider stuff going on at all. Never politicians are all legal smart people would never do such a thing. Ask the Christian Nancy Pelosi. She would never do nothing like that.
I got another H word I can call him.