Who are the real big share holders of $AMDA?
There are not necessarily large shareholders, maybe every other Joe Schmoe owns 3 or 5 shares; and many shares might be inside investment funds. If you are looking for voting rights, typically, the banks/investment companies that host the accounts of the individual shareholders/fund owners have the collective voting rights, so the Fidelity's and Vanguard's of the world will be the main and deciding voters. That is very common.
"Seriously.  I can't tell you how many times I hear this scenario: Kid graduates college; kid runs out and signs lease on apartment ""because that's what you do""**; kid complains that he's in financial trouble and can't make ends meet.   Housemate sharing is most famously displayed in hit shows like Big Bang Theory or New Girl.  They get a much nicer place with better furnishings for way less money.  (However don't hook up with close neighbors or friends of other housemates, they do it for awkward laughs but it really results in awkward departure.)  It's more financially responsible.  It means the rest of your financial life will have more slack.  And when you move, obviously, it's no big deal, you just give all the notice you can, and go to the next town and find another housemate share.   ** I suspect a very significant factor is bringing home dates.  Well, there's nothing sexy about taking your date to McDonalds because you can't afford anything more.  See those shows... it works fine, you just have to be sensible about housemate choices.  Pick housemates who view things the same way, and who themselves are invested in making the shared space attractive, and aren't going to mind some ...activities... once in awhile." "Just for clarification, my perspective on education background is from a front office associate at a BB that interacts with the traders and analysts at other BB's and HF's daily.... many of whom have become good friends.  Take it for what you will.  It's not my role to tell you which is right for you but I can definitely give an honest perspective of which is far more common.   &gt; There were 11,620 people who passed L3 last year   Doesn't take into account the number of these that were already MBA holders (quite a larger percent as MBA has become less competitive and a CFA is required to demonstrate the quantitative capacity of a MBA holder).  This is a huge factor in the skew of your numbers as MBA's have become dime a dozen, MBA holders are now being expected to hold a MS or get a CFA to establish that their quantitative skills are qualified for working on modern day wall st front office roles.  &gt; and became charter holders  Wrong.  Passing L3 doesn't automatically make you a charterholder.  You need the 48 months of approved experience in portfolio management, investment analysis, or market research.  These roles are becoming more and more exclusive to target graduates and mba holders so the likelihood of a CFA charterholder already having a MBA is actually increasing.  &gt; Now lets just take the top 25 MBA programs, that'd be 460 people/class graduating to reach this number. Actual numbers are MUCH lower than this.  Clearly you don't realize the graduate enrollment levels at target schools.  Lets take a look at full time enrollment (meaning 1/2 graduates each year) for the top 10 for finance:  * Wharton:  1,669 * UChi:  1,160 * NYU:  784 * Columbia: 1,264 * MIT:  804 * Stanford:  803 * Harvard:  1,808 * UC Berkley:  492 * UCLA:  750 * Northwestern:  1,201  That's averaging 536 graduates/year per school at the top 10 schools for finance.  To argue that there are no graduates from UNC, Duke, CMU, USC, Emory, Cornell, Georgetown, Dartmouth, Yale, IU, Rice, Vanderbuilt, etc on Wall St would be ignorance in its purest form.  &gt; Trust me, I'm a big fan of the CFA,   You might be a fan but clearly you don't know much about the exam.... keep reading and you'll see why  &gt; but I know some really dumb people who are charter holders because they learned to memorize a test.  Memorize a test?  You can def argue that for L1... Not for L2 or L3.  There's a reason there's such a collective failure amongst candidates that pass 1 and move on to L2 and L3.  L2 requires critical scenario understanding of the concepts more than the formulas itself.  It tests your ability to understand complex and unique FRA (such as repatriated foreign exhange delta's on cash flows)... Not just memorizing a formula and regurgitating.  L3 is even more removed from just formulas as requiring detailed essay responses.  3 hour section with 10-15 multipart essay questions?... yeah sounds like formula memorizing. /s  &gt; These same people would never get admitted to a top 10, no less 25 MBA program.  This is an irrelevant point.  There are plenty of top 10 and top 25 mba program grad's that wouldn't pass the CFA either.  Both emphasize different skillsets.  Front office wall st is becoming more and more geared towards MS holders and CFA charters... many MBA's holders and MBA programs lack the quantitative focus to take these roles and are being denied.  &gt;One thing I will give you, there are WAY too many MBAs in general (partially because of all the part-time, night-time, executive ones)... But an MBA is very different then a CFA in that its banded by school and category.  Absolutely.  That reinforces my entire point that MBA's are dime a dozen.  What are we arguing about again?...  MBA's are very different than a CFA in that even within target schools, they each emphasize on entirely different skills.  MIT Finance mba grads are far more likely to possess strong quantitative than say a Harvard MBA.  The reason is that the CFA is a standard qualification that focuses entirely on quantitative capacity.... it is like a MS in the sense that its a mile deep and a foot wide whereas MBA's are a foot deep and a mile wide.  &gt; Everyone with a CFA has the same CFA; however, a Wharton degrees sure carries a lot more clout than a UMD one...  You're right.  But a CFA isn't meant to be comparable and interchangeable with a Wharton degree.  The CFA's closest comparison is a MS in quantitative/computational finance.  So if you're trying to say CFA is less valuable than a MBA it's apples and oranges.  You never will see a job require a MBA or CFA... the CFA will always be listed on a job role as ""preferred MS/CFA"".  Try comparing CFA against a MS from Columbia or Carnegie Mellon MSCF grad and you might have valid results." Since 2007 the world has seen a period of striking economic and financial volatility featuring the deepest recession since the 1930s despite this gold has performed strongly with its price roughly doubling since the global financial crisis began in mid-2007. 1. Gold and real interest rates: One of the factor that influences gold prices is real interest rate which is to some extent related to inflation. Since gold lacks a yield of its own, the opportunity cost of holding gold increases with a real interest rate increase and decreases with a fall in real interest rates. 2. Gold and the US dollar: The external value of the US dollar has been a significant influence on short-term gold price movements. The IMF estimated6 in 2008 that 40-50% of the moves in the gold price   since 2002 were dollar-related, with a 1% change in the effective   external value of the dollar leading to a more than 1% change in the   gold price (Source).  3. Gold and financial stress: It is a significant and commonly observed influence on the short-term price of gold. In periods of financial stress gold demand may rise for a number of   reasons:  4. Gold and political instability: It is another factor that can boost gold prices. Investor concerns about wars, civil conflicts and international   tensions can boost demand for gold for similar reasons to those noted   above for periods of financial stress. Gold‟s potential function as a   „currency of last resort‟ in case of serious system collapse provides   a particular incentive to hold it in case the political situation is   especially severe. (Source) 5. Gold and official sector activity: The behaviour of central banks and other parts of the official sector can have an important impact on gold prices.  One reason for this is that central banks are big holders of gold,   possessing some 30,500 metric tons in 2010, which is approximately 15%   of all above-ground gold stocks. As a result, central bank policies on   gold sales and purchases can have significant effects, and these   policies have been subject to considerable shifts over the decades. (Source)   (Source of above graphs) The issuer pays (negative money in this case) to the holder.  The person you sold your borrowed bond to gets this (negative) amount.  The person who you lent you the bond is eligible for that (negative) payment, they were the original holder of the bond.  When you return the bond you thus have to compensate the original holder.  Now turn around the cash flows and you're there. The new holder pays the issuer, the original holder pays you. Well, if that's the case the whole article is rubbish because it's not Goldman-Sachs who are excluded, but practically everyone.  This [Vanguard Emerging Markets Government Bond fund](https://personal.vanguard.com/us/funds/snapshot?FundIntExt=INT&amp;FundId=3820#tab=2), which you might have in your 401k, is holding $26M worth of them. That was the first place I thought to look for Venezuelan bonds - I'd expect practically every global emerging markets bond fund would be holding some.  [The executive order only applies to some new funds which have been issued to two government entities and which appear not to have been sold outside Venezuela yet.](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-25/with-u-s-bond-sanctions-walls-close-in-on-venezuela-s-regime)  Edit: [another article from Bloomberg](https://www.bloomberg.com/gadfly/articles/2017-08-25/it-s-hard-to-quit-venezuela-s-debt-when-it-pays-so-well):  &gt; And yet investors have actually been warming up to Venezuelan bonds in the past week. The nation's dollar-denominated debt has gained nearly 1 percent in the period, while notes of the state-owned Petroleos de Venezuela have returned 1.7 percent.   &gt; … anyone who's been plowing money into emerging-market bond funds recently is most likely also investing in Venezuela because its debt makes up about 2 percent of a main broad benchmark that many EM investors use as a guide. "Presumably it means they're paying with normal money rather than paying with stock. Shareholders will receive money rather than any shares of AMZN when the deal goes through.   ""Cash"" doesn't necessarily mean ""currency"" a la bills and coins. When you have money in your brokerage that isn't tied up in a security, for example, you're holding ""cash"" even though you don't physically have ""currency""." CLM is a Closed End Fund. It is a collection of other securities that trades as if it were stock issued by a single company. NASDAQ cares about how it trades, so that would be why they list it as you say they do.  Here is a list of their top 25 holdings: http://portfolios.morningstar.com/fund/holdings?t=CLM&region=usa&culture=en-US Wrong homie. The buy out of country wide was an open market purchase I believe at 5.50 in the spring of 2008. There was no govt deal involved. Just Anglo mazillo riding off into the sunset with his fake tan.