Talk:Cantor Fitzgerald

Tinfoil Hat

Well, congrats to the wack job that added the Cantor-Fitzgerald tinfoil hat theory to the article. It has brought HUGE disrepute to the Wikipedia via an Instapundit link. Good job - hope you're pleased with yourself. Danlovejoy 02:39, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Complain, complain, complain... but here at Wikipedia we believe in fixing problems instead of sitting on the sidelines and complaining about them. You know more about Cantor Fitzgerald? Type it in yourself! This page is now posted as in need of attention. Let us demonstrate our updating skillz... Alba 17:29, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Danlovejoy has a good point. If you go though the history on this article, the mindless drivel portion was added in 2003. The editors either skipped it or agreed with it. This tinhat stuff does make wikipedia look like a partisan hackjob.

I have kids who use Wikipedia. However, I've shown them where political and current events are often about people's postering more than information. Encarta is a better source of objective information than wikipedia except where it gets into subjects that don't make the 'real' encylopedias. You can't find magna discussions in paid ones, but you do here. However, they don't have the hack jobs that you find here.

A minor note to Alba, skills is spelled with an 's' at the end, not a 'z'. My 7 year old wonders why people don't spell correctly here. --Jmcnamera 18:07, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Inform him the plasticity of the English language is one of its strengths. Then segway into a life lesson on how there is more than one right answer; and/or the appropriate context and subtle meaning of informal spelling. PS: How do you spell "segway"? :') - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 00:11, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Segue, but I also think skillz was being used in an ironic/playful way. I have sympathy for employees of this company and for their families. It's unfortunate that some people don't and have to construct a fantasy world. It's even worse when they try to bring that fantasy world to an encyclopedia (when it belongs in an uncyclopedia). Ufwuct 18:10, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Does the talk page look like the main article? People can spell however the hell they want on talk pages. It's not doing you, or anyone else for that matter, any harm. But point taken about tinfoil hat people. We have an issue with one at Sydney Hilton bombing at the moment. - Ta bu shi da yu 13:52, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)antor

Fitzgerald lost 658 employees (all of the employees in the office that day), or about two-thirds of its workforce, considerably more than any other of the World Trade Center tenants or the New York City Police Department and New York City Fire Department. The company was able to bring its trading markets back online within a week.

Am I the only person that finds this statement cold,mercenary and really shocking.58.178.33.222 (talk) 11:39, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Name

I am moving it from "Cantor Fitzgerald Securities" to "Cantor Fitzgerald L.P." which is how the firm refers to itself in press releases. JuntungWu 14:41, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Harassment case

I tweaked the attribution of harassment to make it clear TheStreet.com reported the allegations but did not report the alleged harasment as fact. This case is fairly old, however, with the story from TheStreet.com dated 1997. Have there been any more recent developments?

NPOV

Holy Moses. I came here to see if I could learn something about Cantor Fitzgerald, and I find an article half of whose content is dedicated towards criticisms of the company.

I know very little about this company, but I am sure that they have contributed more to the financial world than a series of scandals. Perhaps someone with more intimate knowledge of them could expand the company info section, and maybe give the criticisms section a POV brushup? SmartGuy 18:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

And now it reads like the company marketing page. 140.247.240.221 06:11, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Still reads like the company marketing page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pedia1234567890 (talk • contribs) 13:40, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Lawsuit

Why did Cantor file a lawsuit against Saudi Arabia? 218.186.9.1 06:08, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok i just read this which answers my question. 218.186.9.1 06:11, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

I just read the article, and I wondered about it too. Should be added to the article, why they filed a suit against Saudi Arabia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.239.85.50 (talk) 17:37, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

First Sentence

"Cantor Fitzgerald L.P. . is a global financial services firm at the forefront of financial and technological innovation." sounds a lot like straight up advertising, changing it to be more neutral — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.90.139.12 (talk) 14:25, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Indeed, I removed a few of the "global" and "in the world" references. Where else would they be? In a parallel universe? Seriously, any kid can create a web site that claims to be "worldwide" now days, so does not convey any information whatsoever. W Nowicki (talk) 17:22, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Investment bank?

Cantor is not an investment bank. It's a broker. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.133.102.59 (talk) 21:54, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Steaming Mad

While Fox News can state "Some executives at Cantor Fitzgerald are steaming mad at their boss, chief executive Howard Lutnick for quietly pocketing a chunk of a $135 million settlement the company received from American Airlines (AAL) over negligence related to the 9-11 terrorist attacks that killed more than 600 of the brokerage firm’s employees", lifting it verbatim and inserting it with only a citation and no quotation marks is pretty dodgy. I am rewriting it.GeeBee60 (talk) 15:16, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Cantor Fitzgerald. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for https://hashtalk.org/topic/5725/500-rememberhashlets
• Attempted to fix sourcing for https://hashtalk.org/topic/36666/remember-hashlets/6

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:02, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Possibly Badly Sourced Section?

The section "Relations to Tether and Terrorist Financing" had been blanked so I restored it, but then noticed a few edits earlier someone removed it saying it wasn't reliably sourced. So I'm not sure if it belongs in the article or not, good sources aren't my expertise on this site :P If someone could have a look to see if it belongs or not, that'd be super helpful! AshLooming (talk) 23:45, 27 October 2023 (UTC)