Originally posted by Eleison Zeitgeist:
Don't really understand your logic. You say that it is as easy to make money in a down economy as in a good economy. However, you then say that in a good economy "you can make money without much knowledge" -- meaning less work?, ergo easier to make money in a good economy than a bad??
Originally posted by Matt Cao:
I think Mark H's strategy also working legally. The difficulty is obtain the information.
Originally posted by Mark Herschberg:
Both my father in the past and our money managers now do intentionally sell at a loss.
--Mark
Originally posted by Matt cao
I think Mark H's strategy also working legally. The difficulty is obtain the information. If Joe Sucker see the same information like Mark, Joe probably will not buy the stock from him. But if Joe is a deep pocket fella, he still wants to purchase at that price or lower toward the bottom. Money movement like roller coaster, what go up must come down, what been down must go up eventually.
Sometimes the only way things ever got fixed is because people became uncomfortable.
Originally posted by Tim Holloway:
Mark, I think you'll make a good short trader. You completely missed the issue that some people would have qualms over not sharing information that could financially hurt poor old Joe Sucker.
Originally posted by Mark Herschberg:
I think you're all missing the point. I'm talking about information in an information theory sense, not as some concrete inside information. The latter is illegal.
People and companies trade on models, e.g. equations. Anyone can make an equation, and most people make them based on running regressions against historical data. Anyone can do that. Some people can make better equations. If the true price is $52, and your model says $48-53 and my model says $51.50-52.50, I would say my model is better and therefore I have more information than you. There is nothing at all illegal or immoral about it. Warren Buffet doesn't tell everyone what he is going to buy before he buys it (in fact, doing so would cost you money, and is illegal under some circumstances).
--Mark
Sometimes the only way things ever got fixed is because people became uncomfortable.
Originally posted by Tim Holloway:
I'm a little disoriented myself when you start using the term "model", since it's generally taken as a given in investment circles that individual investors at least don't have a good formal model, but invest altogether too much on emotion (I'll accept an emotional basis as an example of an unconscious model if you like). Of course, the same emotional charges have been laid against the pros, despite their more formal bases and AIs.
Originally posted by Tim Holloway:
The one thing I do feel obliged to make clear is that the perceived ethical dilemma of short-selling has nothing to do with insider trading. Not in the sense, at least that gets the SEC on your case. All of us here are presumably "insiders" in the tech industry. Relatively few of us are executives or board members or Martha Stewart. So if we see a trend, like say, a slowdown of people buying Windows at the same time a lot of people are installing Linux, we may decide to short Microsoft. But a sale takes two parties. Someone has got to buy the stock and that somebody is probably not anticipating seeing the price drop radically enough to make a short sale profitable. So we're setting up old Joe S. for a fall. And some people feel uncomfortable taking advantage of poor old Joe's gullibility 'cause he thinks that Microsoft will go up forever.
Originally posted by Tim Holloway:
BTW, Matt, Air Florida gained a brief notoriety about 20 years back when one of its airliners built up too much ice on its wings and slammed into a Washington DC bridge. Within a few years they went out of business. Assets were liquidated according to the standard rules, which means that creditors got paid first, shareholders were at the end of the line. There was nothing left for the shareholders. I had 1200 shares.
Sometimes what goes down doesn't come back up.![]()
Sometimes the only way things ever got fixed is because people became uncomfortable.
Originally posted by Tim Holloway:
Simple. We're clever, so we're going to be right! He's wrong!
Originally posted by Tim Holloway:
You yourself take an objective attitude which is that you invest knowing the risks. Long sales can leave both sides with a net gain, but in a short sale in the short term, someone has to get burned. And that's all the difference there is. Some people don't want to do that. Other take the attitude of "a fool and his money..." and merrily sell short at the drop of a hat.
Originally posted by Joe Pluta:
Nope. The guy who sold it to you at $45 before it went to $60 lost out.
"The key is that people have different time horizons."
Sometimes the only way things ever got fixed is because people became uncomfortable.
pie. tiny ad:
Building a Better World in your Backyard by Paul Wheaton and Shawn Klassen-Koop
https://coderanch.com/wiki/718759/books/Building-World-Backyard-Paul-Wheaton
|