If past history was all there was to the game, the richest people would be librarians.
This is an efficient way to save funds from office space and fuel expenses. Whilst cutting fees, it is wise to cut them in the right areas as cutting fees in the wrong regions can have a disastrous or damaging effect. Always look for great worth for cash and this can be achieved by preserving great connection with suppliers and partnership organisations.
For all the ‘quant-lites’ out there (such as me). Learn how to code appropriately. Very accessible for amateur programmers without degrees in laptop science (or in my case one particular third of a degree. Well probably one ninth if we are becoming pedantic). You need to read this book at least each year lest you get into negative habits, particularly if like me you never have any individual often peer reviewing your code.
One particular caveat is that the authors are clear that they quantify the expense of increasing equity capital requirements, rather than the price of escalating equity capital. It could be that the price of escalating equity capital needs is low, not since the expense of raising equity is low, but because banks have other techniques of complying with the specifications (e.g. other loopholes, or changing the riskiness of the assets they invest in). Nevertheless, the paper gives revolutionary proof that escalating capital requirements is much decrease than what several banks claim.
Meanwhile, for other nations (Greece and Italy as examples), the Krugmans of the globe cite absence of the potential to depreciate your currency as the significant weakness of a currency union. Can these economists have it both ways? Currency depreciation is excellent for you currency depreciation is negative for you. I guess which way the wind blows depends upon your present political stance, not the underlying economics.