Talk:Trading Places

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Pennsylvania Start‑class

	Pennsylvania portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Film: American C‑class

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Comedy Start‑class Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Philadelphia Start‑class Low‑importance

	Philadelphia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philadelphia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Philadelphia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhiladelphiaWikipedia:WikiProject PhiladelphiaTemplate:WikiProject PhiladelphiaPhiladelphia articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Holidays: Christmas Start‑class Low‑importance

	Holidays portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Holidays, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of holidays on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HolidaysWikipedia:WikiProject HolidaysTemplate:WikiProject HolidaysHolidays articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Christmas task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Christianity: Christmas Start‑class Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Christmas task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Anecdote needs explanation

In the scene that starts with the "zeta chi" harmony, just prior to Winthrope entering, one of the girls is telling a story that end with the punchline "...and she stepped on the ball". I have heard that this story is a part of a rather well-kown anecdote in plebian circles (which unfortunately I do not remember the source thereof) and I would like to see it explained in a "popular culture" section of the article, should someone have the resources to do so.Radzewicz (talk) 17:08, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Found it.Radzewicz (talk) 17:33, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation of climactic scene

The following statement is wrong and should either be corrected or removed:

"In actual markets, price limits – "limit up" and "limit down" – protect the clearinghouse from defaults and would preclude such a drastic price jump."

While it is true that most expiration months do limit the price up and down movement of a days trading, the "spot month" (meaning the nearest expiration month) is not subject to those volatility limits and may, in fact, swing as wildly as in the movie. Thus, such a drastic price jump is not precluded by the rules of the exchange when applied to the spot month, as in the movie, thus the statement is wrong, and the scene as presented is believable.Radzewicz (talk) 17:09, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The End of the Film

I would be grateful if someone could explain the ending of the film. I am not familiar with the workings of the commodities market and I have been trying to figure out what happened for twenty years. --Feitclub 02:11, Dec 17, 2004 (UTC)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086465/board/flat/4331603 it explains it here.

Ha. I did some research on my own and added an explanation on the main page without seeing the requests on the talk page. If you still find it confusing, let me know (give me a shout-out on my talk page). Jkatzen 10:02, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The first bullet point in the explanation isn't true. You can short sell stock as well. Margins work differently, however.

Right, but "short-selling" a stock is in actuality a futures contract -- the name is deceptive, as shares aren't immediately sold by the "short-seller". Instead he agrees to sell shares in the future for the price on the current date. If the value goes down in the future, he could buy shares at the future (cheaper) time and then immediately sell them to his optioner for a profit. Jkatzen 02:39, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just a thought about the description of the ending. The article states that it isn't clear how much Valentine and Winthorp made, but doesn't mention the Dukes' statement after they are faced with the margin call. He responds with "You know perfectly well we haven't got 394 million dollars in cash!" I'm not sure if that helps or not, but it at least shows how much they lost. --joshua orvis 04:36, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still fuzzy about the end of the movie: Winthorp and Valentine start selling at $1.42, but what are they selling??? How do they have FCOJ to sell? I mean, the movie didn't show that they had ever bought any FCOJ, at least not until the price tanked after the report. So, I understand how the Dukes got ruined, but I don't understand how they made any money; they just bought a lot of OJ futures at a low price.24.168.65.131 00:31, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need to actually own the FCOJ at the time of sell; just so long as you own it by the time you and the buyer have agreed you will give it to them. Thanos6 02:29, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More precisely, they are trading contracts (the underlying terms of the contracts are to deliver goods by a said date). In the interim before that expiration date, the contracts can be purchased and sold. In this instance, Winthorp and Valentine sold the contracts first and bought them back to close the transaction thereafter, in effect a short sale. Really no different than a normal transaction except the buy and sell actions are reversed The differential in price between the the two actions is their profit. The Dukes are on the other side of Winthorpe and Valentine's trade, buying the contracts first and being forced to close out their contracts at a depressed price.

Ok, now it makes sense to me. I guess it didn't occur to me that you could sell something you don't own yet, but you're right; as long as you have the oranges to me on the date we agreed to, it isn't really my concern when you got them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.117.162.35 (talk) 21:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The explanation of the climactic scene was removed on Feb 5 by Treybien because of original research. I think these comments prove the value of that section - I replaced it, but I removed what I found to be the original research within it. 96.227.189.126 (talk) 14:55, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, maybe worth mentioning somewhere is that the entire setup of the end of the film with the stealing of confidential papers and stock manipulation is borrowed from (or perhaps an homage to) the beginning of the 1922 Fritz Lang silent thriller Dr. Mabuse, The Gambler. I can't imagine two more different films, but there it is. Banjochris (talk) 03:20, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've just made some edits to the main page, with all respect to the original author/s.

A couple of typo's were corrected, and a few scenes which were out-of-place were corrected.

For instance, the scene where the Dukes explain to Valentine just what they do doesn't take place in the car, but at the office, and Winthorp attempts to shoot himself AFTER the bus ride.

I used as much of the original text as possible when making the changes. I also added one or two extra bits for flavour.

Gardener of Geda 13:21, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Winthorpe Valentine

Why was the link to Winthorpe Valentine removed from the Trivia section? It's a working link, and it appears to be a legitimate site. Presumably its founders are fans of this film. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.2.124.11 (talk • contribs) 00:13, 12 December 2006.

Because the linked website has no relevancy whatsoever to the topic of this article. --Ezeu 00:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Plot summary too long

Do we really need a long form description of the entire move? I think a plot summary should be exactly that - a brief, general synopsys.

I agree. The synopsis was fine two or three months ago, but someone has gone in and done a "describe every scene in a blow-by-blow account of the film". I would suggest that the synopsis is reverted to what it was. Arthur Holland 13:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spongebob

The reference may be obvious, but shouldn't there be a citation anyway? It's not like figuring out the character 'Dark Claw' is a mix of Batman and Wolverine... Lots42 11:50, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Money Clip

What about the money clip scene that was a total accident? Shouldn't that be in the trivia section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.215.251.214 (talk) 12:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where was that film? What is the name of that building? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.56.64.138 (talk) 17:49, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Undocumented Scene Edit?

There's a scene where mr beeks, pushes a random person down, before planting the stolen money on winthorpe. in the background while he's pushing the guy down, the wall is strangely blurred, or appears to be. anyone else noticed that? i'm speaking of the current HBO version of the film. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.24.12.91 (talk) 06:19, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bank Scene

The bank scene in which Winthorp has been told that the IRS has frozen his assests is bogus. His downfall starts with a phony theft which would only be a petty theft charge for $150- hardly worth of Federal attention. The subsequent assumptions about dealing drugs which would actually only be a charge for a small amount of PCP(?)possession- no evidence of sale. The IRS wouldn't even have had time or the intention or ability to freeze his assests after only an arrest.Dcrasno (talk) 22:54, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As all of what you say is true, it's also likely that, in the context of the story, the bank scene, that is, Winthorp's assets being frozen, was orchestrated by the Duke brothers. They're shown to be extremely influential in the New York financial world, both personally and by family history.

They do after all have to ruin Winthorp utterly and completely to make sure their little scenario gets played out according to terms of the bet.

Could they be so influential as to have an entire bank do their dastardly bidding, including blaming it on the IRS? Possibly a stretch, but it is after all a movie...Gulfstorm75 (talk) 01:07, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]