OPINION: The Illusion of Analysis — Who Has the Right to Speak?
By Eric Rory Oso, Founder, Eric Rory Oso Investment Analysis (EROIA)
DISCLAIMER: The following content represents a personal opinion and is not intended as financial advice. This article is for informational and educational purposes only and should not be considered a recommendation to buy or sell securities. Eric Rory Oso is not a licensed financial advisor and does not hold a Series 65 or other FINRA licensing. Readers should consult a licensed professional for investment advice.
Thesis
Given the legalities and analytical air surrounding the current wave of financial decision-making within our Presidential cabinet and the Federal Reserve, one can conclude that the basis of data-driven forward thinking is undergoing a loose change in both its approach, its derivatives, and its application towards an economic priority. Now, the fundamental word analyst is starting to cross over into a new territory, given access to data and the ability to shout it from the rooftops, due to the plethora of applications and industries. Is this territory particularly one that we want to delve into, and is it prudent to follow this route, and is that prudency for which group of people exactly? From a pure financial perspective, are we now throwing around scientific analytics too easily? What is the definition of science? Is it as broad as the term analysis? Is a doctorate enough to call yourself on the level of, say, a scientist or brain surgeon? There are levels, pieces of paper, and legalities that present themselves in a way that gives analytical superiority in the face of others. I believe fallacy enters the room in terms of referential data and the legal truth behind it. A piece of paper in this analogy is irrelevant, given the paper in your bank account or how many fancy words are thrown on a paper, followed by the word science. Are we getting the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth when referring to data by our AI-driven programs, or have these means of, well, I should say gathering data, although other people have...different...approaches to using it, become corrupted by an ego inflating derivative of overcompensation of personal self-esteem issues and psychosis manufactured by the average user? Is this the data you disagree with, and is it worth throwing someone in an infinite loop or destroying a career? What are the parameters or steps to achieve this data? Are there legalities behind it, and is the presentation the problem, or does the rabbit hole go deeper? The truth is exactly what is needed, and in the world of TikTok, do we have legitimate people from whom we acquire this truth? A big step in an investor and analyst's life is to earn the right to SPEAK. This is a scrutiny by legal, federal, and monetary parameters that locks financial gurus and investors to a strict code of ethics that can be broken, beaten, and abused if done improperly. We need to discuss where the analytical line is drawn and what constitutes financial advice across many different industries. Real Estate is a very easy target. Aside from my misfortune in the industry, let's talk about financial advice for a second. Now, as an investor and a market research analyst, without a Series 65 license, given by the FINRA and scrutinized by a Federal Background Check, I simply cannot pick a stock for you. I can give you an analysis and give an analytically based opinion, but if I drive your ship without that license, I have broken Federal Laws. Let me just ask, financial comedy aside, why is it always a good time to buy or sell? Are we possibly putting guiding financial decisions in the hands of amateurs and salespeople? Is picking a price for the home and the time to sell giving direct financial advice, like say a stock choice? Since you are technically talking about performance-based financial guidance. Are you not? How did you acquire that data? Could you manipulate that data to tell a narrative based on your gains? Where does regulation start and end, and is this as scrutinized as say finance, education, medicine, or engineering? That is a lot to ponder. Is the American Dream not to own a home one day? Are we policing the terms of borrowing, financing, and pricing on a federally scrutinized level, such as a financial consultant or an asset manager? I think the guidance of our financial futures must be extremely transparent. Do we care how the President looks, or do we care how the President performs? Is his world not technically built around real estate? Speculative narratives aside, are we doing what is best for the financial future of America? And what constitutes the bar for a good financial future? Is it based on the economy, corporate bottom lines, the financial markets, the middle class, the lower class, or the upper class? We need standards and regulations. This is the basis of the law. We all need to follow and build where many standards have been reconstructed or were never present in the first place. Analytics are coming soon. Welcome to Eric Rory Oso Investment Analysis. I hope you stay along for the ride.
Supporting Referential Data:
1. Regulatory Framework
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and FINRA define financial advice as recommendations that are "individualized" and "based on a particular investment’s value or performance."
Series 65 is required for Registered Investment Advisors (RIAs). See: FINRA Licensing Requirements
2. Rise of Unlicensed Financial Influencers
According to a 2024 study by the CFA Institute, 48% of retail investors under 35 say they make investment decisions based on TikTok or YouTube finance content.
An SEC investor alert in 2023 warned of “misleading and potentially fraudulent financial influencer activity” via social media platforms.
3. Real Estate and Financial Advice Gray Area
Real estate agents are not federally licensed to give financial advice but often advise on timing, pricing, and mortgage structuring.
CFPB and HUD have noted growing concern about "performance-based sales tactics" that mimic investment advice without legal accountability.
4. Presidential and Federal Reserve Impact
Interest rate decisions by the Federal Reserve (e.g., 2022–2024 hikes from 0.25% to 5.5%) had material market effects, including an estimated $1.7 trillion devaluation in home equity nationally (source: Zillow, 2024).
Fiscal narratives tied to real estate portfolios of political leaders have influenced speculative investments and property bubbles, as shown in a Brookings Institution report on U.S. executive holdings and real estate policy (2023).
