Search found 993 matches
- Wed Mar 12, 2014 2:37 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: modern financial theory has finally caught up with Buffett
- Replies: 48
- Views: 8939
Re: modern financial theory has finally caught up with Buffe
You say "if it weren't for the insurance businesses, he wouldn't be NEARLY as successful." That statement makes no sense. The insurance businesses are part and parcel of his successful business model. Berkshire Hathaway would be a different company without it's insurance businesses. Insurance businesses are among the many types of businesses Buffett invests in. You are welcome to respond, but you don't need to, as I have no desire to belabor this particular point. regards Before he even got involved with owning insurance companies for the sole purpose of using its float he was a successful investor - that's what ALLOWED him to get to the point of buying insurance companies outright instead of just their stock. He didn't magically...
- Tue Mar 11, 2014 4:31 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: modern financial theory has finally caught up with Buffett
- Replies: 48
- Views: 8939
Re: modern financial theory has finally caught up with Buffe
Er...what?terrabiped wrote:Why overlook the insurance companies? Berkshire Hathaway is the Buffett investment strategy.FredPeterson wrote:Why does it seem most articles about Buffett being a great investor somehow overlook the fact that if it weren't for the insurance businesses, he wouldn't be NEARLY as successful.
I don't mean the insurance businesses influenced his decisions (although to be fair, they have, immensely, since he knows he has the protection of the float every year) but I mean successful in terms of wealth.
Please recollect your thoughts and reply again, as your question/statement make zero sense.
Berkshire Hathaway is a holding company. Its chief money making investments/holdings are the (re)insurance businesses AINEC.
- Tue Mar 11, 2014 12:31 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: modern financial theory has finally caught up with Buffett
- Replies: 48
- Views: 8939
Re: modern financial theory has finally caught up with Buffe
Why does it seem most articles about Buffett being a great investor somehow overlook the fact that if it weren't for the insurance businesses, he wouldn't be NEARLY as successful.
I don't mean the insurance businesses influenced his decisions (although to be fair, they have, immensely, since he knows he has the protection of the float every year) but I mean successful in terms of wealth.
I don't mean the insurance businesses influenced his decisions (although to be fair, they have, immensely, since he knows he has the protection of the float every year) but I mean successful in terms of wealth.
- Tue Jun 25, 2013 10:10 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Why is Morningstar's chart so different from Yahoo's?
- Replies: 12
- Views: 4362
Re: Why is Morningstar's chart so different from Yahoo's?
The FIS chart on Morningstar does not contain the $16.80 "dividend" that Yahoo shows on July 3rd 2008.
This was a spinoff event of Lender Processing Services
http://www.lpsvcs.com/LPSCorporateInfor ... 80702.aspx
Morningstars graph is "wrong" because it does not take this into account.
But I think what is also happening is it included the spinoff event as an immediate reinvestment rather then a divesture of funds.
This was a spinoff event of Lender Processing Services
http://www.lpsvcs.com/LPSCorporateInfor ... 80702.aspx
Morningstars graph is "wrong" because it does not take this into account.
But I think what is also happening is it included the spinoff event as an immediate reinvestment rather then a divesture of funds.
- Mon Jun 03, 2013 11:49 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: uh oh...homes becoming bank accounts again
- Replies: 25
- Views: 3789
Re: uh oh...homes becoming bank accounts again
Apple just put out bonds for a few billion. This indicates they do not have this billion in savings? Why?HardKnocker wrote:Someone I know just borrowed $30k against his house for his daughter's wedding. This guy makes a great income too.
In addition to just being a dumb thing to do period, it indicates to me he doesn't have $30k in savings. Why? He lives beyond his means.
Oops, no, thats not what it means. It means the capital they have in place is busy making more then the interest payments cost. Therefore the smarter decision is to actually use borrowed money because it ends up costing you less then if you paid it out of pocket.
You may still be right though.
- Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:59 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: "really bad hour" at about 1:10pm today?
- Replies: 34
- Views: 4898
Re: "really bad hour" at about 1:10pm today?
There are some things you cannot control. But here, I think it's a terrific reminder that if you're placing an order to buy an ETF, you'd probably be better served by placing a limit order and avoiding "market price" altogether. Artsdoctor Indeed, these types of events make me no more fearful of using ETFs, though they do make me thankful that I'm past my pre-boglehead days when I used to think that leaving a trailing stop order open might be a good idea. Nowadays I'm tempted to think I could benefit from leaving an open buy limit order at some wildly low price with the slim chance of catching a deal on some market glitch. Your order would be cancelled. You better then hope you don't immediately turn it around and sell when it re...
- Tue Apr 23, 2013 2:46 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: "really bad hour" at about 1:10pm today?
- Replies: 34
- Views: 4898
- Wed Mar 06, 2013 12:34 pm
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: Emergency Fund - Lifestyle fund or living expense fund?
- Replies: 16
- Views: 2446
Re: Emergency Fund - Lifestyle fund or living expense fund?
902 reads and not even 1/9th votes. Very odd. Anyway. The psychology behind it being a living expense vs lifestyle fund is just that. Psychological. If you really were without income for 8 months and had to drop everything social that kept you sane, personally I would get depressed and withdrawn. It would make life difficult to get back on track. This is *exactly* the trap that poor, un-employed people fall into - they have no money for "the spice of life" and then get stuck (to a degree and no, lets not dive into that I'm merely making a singular point that requires no furthur discussion) If you are "financially independent" then you don't even have a salaried based income and are likely living off dividends. Could thos...
- Mon Mar 04, 2013 10:38 am
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: Emergency Fund - Lifestyle fund or living expense fund?
- Replies: 16
- Views: 2446
Re: Emergency Fund - Lifestyle fund or living expense fund?
I mean if your source of income is lost - not that you have a sudden unplanned expense. That would be a true 'emergency' and as such is not even possible to quantify how big it should be. 'Emergency' isn't the right term in this case.
So let me clarify: Loss of personal income and assuming no unplanned expenses during the period of no income. Some would call that an emergency I suppose. But saying "loss of job fund" doesn't sound as catchy heh.
So let me clarify: Loss of personal income and assuming no unplanned expenses during the period of no income. Some would call that an emergency I suppose. But saying "loss of job fund" doesn't sound as catchy heh.
- Mon Mar 04, 2013 10:11 am
- Forum: Personal Finance (Not Investing)
- Topic: Emergency Fund - Lifestyle fund or living expense fund?
- Replies: 16
- Views: 2446
Emergency Fund - Lifestyle fund or living expense fund?
Just a curiosity poll to see where people are at. I'm going to guess it will weigh heavily in favor of lifestyle in one of the categories. This is also of course geared towards people who have a normally taxable income (you're not retired). Okay so what do I mean? Your emergency fund, how would you define yours? Lifestyle Emergency Fund: Don't have to change a single thing about your daily/monthly expenses. Gym membership? Keep going. Venti Starbucks every day - keep going. NetFlix? Keep watching. Movie every weekend? Keep going. Nothing changes except you can get up at 10am and go to bed at 1am. Living Expense Emergency Fund: Enough cash to cover shelther, food and "mobility" expenses (gas money, cab fare etc, to find a new job)....
- Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:02 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: does the SEC publish a list of securities approved for short
- Replies: 3
- Views: 379
Re: does the SEC publish a lsit of securities approved for s
Please don't consider short selling unless you really know what you're doing.pinnerman12 wrote:by the way when i short am i selling security that nobody owns?
also, if i establish a position in a stock am i shorting if i sell the security for my account
With that said....
All stock that exists is owned by someone. It might be owned by your broker, but it is still owned by someone.
Long positions and short positions are kept 100% separate. The two have no connection whatsoever. You don't even have to own any stock at all to short sell.
- Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:34 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Market "melt up" and the Airplane Game
- Replies: 71
- Views: 8935
Re: Market "melt up" and the Airplane Game
Yes excited because its safe to invest, gotta get in on those gains! The same missing out as the dotcom, albeit not the same level.Tom_T wrote:Some people are getting excited/nervous over the fact that the Dow is approaching the all-time high it reached six years ago?
Nervous because many still see the economy as having not improved enough to warrant the "high" prices of things.
- Mon Jan 21, 2013 2:13 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Brokers are dead men walking, they just don't know it
- Replies: 60
- Views: 8207
Re: Brokers are dead men walking, they just don't know it
With 84% of the money still in non-index fund investments, it looks like the broker model of investing still has a few more miles to go before it falls over. Rather amazing when you think about it. Keep plugging along and spreading the word, Mr. Swedroe. You're doing good work. I think an appropriate measure of the decline is of that 84% of money, how much of it is older then 10 years? In other words, its only been in the last 5-10 years that passive investing has begun to take off. If inflows to indexing are out pacing active, its only a matter time, albeit perhaps a very long time, that indexing will win over. But there will always be "old money" that will forever be in active and that "old money" is the really big mo...
- Sat Jan 12, 2013 5:18 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: 1,812% Gain in the next 219 Days
- Replies: 18
- Views: 3816
Re: 1,812% Gain in the next 219 Days
What was the ticker so we can follow it, or did you have to ship mobnies first?
- Wed Jan 02, 2013 9:31 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: 2013 BOGLEHEAD CONTEST REGISTRATION
- Replies: 481
- Views: 37807
- Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:33 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Bogleheads 2013 Hedgefund Contest
- Replies: 151
- Views: 23995
Re: Bogleheads 2013 Hedgefund Contest
No Idea What I'm Doing
Long
BAC
LNG
Short
HLF
JCP
Long
BAC
LNG
Short
HLF
JCP
- Mon Dec 17, 2012 12:17 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Gold continues to fall
- Replies: 178
- Views: 20280
Re: Gold continues to fall
You do realize that what happened with silver has nothing to do with what is happening to gold right now, right? Silver went parabolic because of the Hunt Brothers and nothing more.heyyou wrote:Having witnessed the silver boom and bust in the early 1980s, I just can't see buying gold.
Know how to make a small fortune in silver? Start with a large fortune. The Hunt brothers of Dallas lost 90% or more of their wealth due to their greed.
"If a Texan thinks that there's a chance, chances will be taken." David Allen Coe
- Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:20 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: It's not enough to be right
- Replies: 12
- Views: 1399
Re: It's not enough to be right
I hate to bring up this due to his poor performance in the last two years, but John Paulson was "wrong" for something like 2 years and lost hundreds of millions of dollars before things finally imploded as some suspected would occur.nisiprius wrote:He wasn't right. William Miller and his followers bet their worldly possessions on the proposition that the Second Coming would occur on October 22, 1844. They were wrong. They would still have been wrong if the world had ended on May 21, 2011. They will still be wrong if the world ends on December 21, 2012. Someday the world will end. And they will still have been wrong.
And Meredith Whitney.
Was he right?
Well per your logic above it didn't matter, he was wrong. But ended up being right.
- Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:11 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Is gold finally stalling out?
- Replies: 105
- Views: 7637
Re: Is gold finally stalling out?
This is not getting near the love it should.zhiwiller wrote:Is AAPL finally stalling out? I couldn't help but notice it peaked in September at 705. It dipped to about 527 and has been limping along ever since.
Stay the course.
The people who start gold threads are almost always going to be bashing it either directly or in some round about trying-to-sound-smart way.
- Mon Dec 03, 2012 8:54 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Automatic DRIP effectiveness
- Replies: 4
- Views: 560
Re: Automatic DRIP effectiveness
Havn't other studies shown that doing an actual DRIP vs a lump sum of the dividend every year makes little difference in the long run unless the reinvestment occurs at a high?
In other words, I think you're better off just letting it do its thing rather then fiddle with it yourself every month.
In other words, I think you're better off just letting it do its thing rather then fiddle with it yourself every month.
- Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:50 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Lottery fever: cash or annuity?
- Replies: 45
- Views: 4819
Re: Lottery fever: cash or annuity?
I highlighted why.richard wrote:Why would annuity payments be tax free?FredPeterson wrote:The lump sum after taxes was $220,176,500. If you wanted to give yourself an annuity after taking the lump sum that would be $7.3m tax free every year for 30 years.
The lump sum was ~$350 before taxes and its $220 after taxes. The use of the term annuity in this case is wrong, sort of. I generically used the term to mean an annual payment being drawn from the already taxed lump sum.
- Thu Nov 29, 2012 10:08 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Lottery fever: cash or annuity?
- Replies: 45
- Views: 4819
Re: Lottery fever: cash or annuity?
I've always been a lump sum'er, but when the numbers for the annuity are SO big - it comes down to trusting whether the annuity would actually be able to pay out all 30 years.
The powerball website had it all laid out for each state.
For Wisconsin the annuity was $5,995,371 the first year, increasing 4% per year for 30 years for $336m total with the final payout being $18.6m
The lump sum after taxes was $220,176,500. If you wanted to give yourself an annuity after taking the lump sum that would be $7.3m tax free every year for 30 years.
Or you could just conservatively invest the $220m and earn 2% / year and have $4.4m (before taxes) for life...with of course the option for reinvestment.
The powerball website had it all laid out for each state.
For Wisconsin the annuity was $5,995,371 the first year, increasing 4% per year for 30 years for $336m total with the final payout being $18.6m
The lump sum after taxes was $220,176,500. If you wanted to give yourself an annuity after taking the lump sum that would be $7.3m tax free every year for 30 years.
Or you could just conservatively invest the $220m and earn 2% / year and have $4.4m (before taxes) for life...with of course the option for reinvestment.
- Tue Nov 27, 2012 10:15 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Bogleheads are Highly Skilled Investors
- Replies: 54
- Views: 9827
Re: Bogleheads are Highly Skilled Investors
I know how to play football. I know how to play every position. But theres just no way I could compete at high High School or college or professional levels, therefore I do the sensible thing and play Madden NFL on my favorite console game system. I pretend like I'm making a lot of decisions and putting my back into it, but really a lot of the time it comes down to picking the right plays with the right team and just letting the computer play it out**. In the context of this site, the analogy is like picking indexing with Vanguard and letting the market play it out.
Is that skill? Sure...But to attempt to compare the skill of doing nothing* with the skill of actually participating, thats ridiculous.
Is that skill? Sure...But to attempt to compare the skill of doing nothing* with the skill of actually participating, thats ridiculous.
- Thu Nov 15, 2012 11:52 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: GLD gold etf is doomed to fail?
- Replies: 47
- Views: 6599
Re: GLD gold etf is doomed to fail?
Why do I feel like your logic implies the share price goes nowhere or down and doesn't even consider up?
- Mon Nov 12, 2012 11:33 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Is asking about individual stocks frowned upon?
- Replies: 37
- Views: 3854
Re: Is asking about individual stocks frowned upon?
*grunch*pkcrafter wrote:Eighty percent of all trades are done by professionals and this is all they do. When you buy, you are buying from someone who is selling, so chances are you will be trading with a professional. Why is he selling?
I think the rise of HFT makes this not a valid argument.
HFT is about providing liquidity and someone getting paid for it. Yes, the bots try to make money, but they don't care one way or the other about why they are buying or selling other then looking at the momentum and shaving pennies/sub-pennies of profit.
- Fri Oct 26, 2012 4:32 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: CPI inflation rate vs. personal inflation rate??
- Replies: 20
- Views: 1478
Re: CPI inflation rate vs. personal inflation rate??
They should come out with a couple calculations - one that is useful to people who need to survive and another for the people who have money to spend.
- Mon Oct 22, 2012 9:32 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Boglehead way to take on more risk than 100% equities?
- Replies: 25
- Views: 2626
Re: Boglehead way to take on more risk than 100% equities?
If "the Boglehead way" allows for the use of leverage, theres your answer.
- Sun Oct 14, 2012 7:42 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: I got sideswiped today by co-workers on this subject
- Replies: 58
- Views: 7696
Re: I got sideswiped today by co-workers on this subject
Please share where you can guarantee me 15% stock market returns for the next X years, the years I have left on my mortgage.
Both you and your co-workers are using extreme recency bias in your decision to believe you are more right then the other.
Both you and your co-workers are using extreme recency bias in your decision to believe you are more right then the other.
- Tue Sep 18, 2012 9:24 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Baby Boomer Sell Off???
- Replies: 16
- Views: 2261
Re: Baby Boomer Sell Off???
In the stock and bond world, someone has to own it. In other words, no thing such as "supply" in the stock world. Its a 1:1 ratio. You can't sell stock and it just "sits" in the void. Where'd the money come from that you got for it? it doesn't "sit in the void", but the market maker can buy it (and then sell to others.) If there are too many sellers, he will have to drop the price in order to entice new buyers. Otherwise, by your logic, stocks would never go up or down in value, since every buyer is matched by a seller. durr Every buyer is matched thats why stocks change in price. The B/A is irrelevant to the point. When every buyer and seller isn't matched the security goes nowhere until someone gives in to t...
- Tue Sep 18, 2012 1:38 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Baby Boomer Sell Off???
- Replies: 16
- Views: 2261
Re: Baby Boomer Sell Off???
In the stock and bond world, someone has to own it. In other words, no thing such as "supply" in the stock world. Its a 1:1 ratio. You can't sell stock and it just "sits" in the void. Where'd the money come from that you got for it?
Unless there is another major panic in the next 5-10 years that results in baby boomers selling AND the younger generation selling, the potential drop will be muted.
Unless there is another major panic in the next 5-10 years that results in baby boomers selling AND the younger generation selling, the potential drop will be muted.
- Tue Aug 21, 2012 1:29 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Buffett May Be Turning Bearish on Munis.
- Replies: 6
- Views: 2776
Re: Buffett May Be Turning Bearish on Munis.
When a perma-bull who built his conglomerate off the back of insurance, sells the insurance he sold...its likely because he believes he'll have to pay up sometime in the near future.
Since Buffett doesn't short, thats about as bearish a sentinment as you can get from someone like him.
Since Buffett doesn't short, thats about as bearish a sentinment as you can get from someone like him.
- Fri Aug 17, 2012 8:45 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: how often do you check your portfolio?
- Replies: 94
- Views: 10876
Re: how often do you check your portfolio?
I check mine daily. But unlike the masses that check daily, I don't feel the need to fiddle. I'm 100% comfortable with everything I own as it sits right now. The only thing I'm considering moving on recently is SIRI - but those 1000 shares bought at 6.5c are still sitting on free money right now, so other then the $2500 its turned into now (I should have held the 50k shares originally *sigh* it would have made up for all the mistakes) I have no incentive really other then to 'capture' that profit. Even if it fell 50% from here I don't think I'd sell. I have 3 Yahoo! portfolios setup - one is my Ameritrade portfolio of just the stocks held, 1 share each. The other is my Vanguard portfolio of ETF's and the other is a portfolio of the TDA and ...
- Fri Aug 17, 2012 8:37 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: facebook's first lock up expires today,
- Replies: 63
- Views: 13700
Re: facebook's first lock up expires today,
This is indeed true and I use the infinity term a lot. I am unaware though of a stock that has gone to infinity. Basically a short can determine when he/she would close the position if the stock goes up just like a long would decide when the close a position if the stock goes down. I suspect the short sellers are more sophisticated and will not tolerate the same degree of loss as a long who might hold until they get even, which could be forever. But infinity is so much more fun to say! Plus, how do you say the opposite of "it can only go to zero"? :) Shorts have less of a degree of tolerable loss for the same reason a long holds forever. There is no limit to the loss. Plus the unsophisticated and small shorter is likely to not ha...
- Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:01 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: facebook's first lock up expires today,
- Replies: 63
- Views: 13700
Re: facebook's first lock up expires today,
Because even expectations can have the nasty habit of being wrong.harikaried wrote:Why didn't everyone just short then? Could have been 5-6% richer in a day!FredPeterson wrote:As expected, it has dropped pretty good.
(Edit: Actually kinda serious because I'm not familiar with how selling short actually works. Or is it as simple as putting in a short sell order.. and putting in a buy later?)
I'm sure plenty of prop traders and active retail traders DID short over the last couple of days in preparation for this day.
But short selling is also so negatively viewed that you just don't hear about it. Plus your upside on a short is always limited to the short value itself instead of infinite with a long position, so its not nearly as glorious.
- Thu Aug 16, 2012 9:32 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: facebook's first lock up expires today,
- Replies: 63
- Views: 13700
Re: facebook's first lock up expires today,
As expected, it has dropped pretty good.
- Tue Aug 14, 2012 11:16 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Cramer At It Again
- Replies: 37
- Views: 5281
Re: Cramer At It Again
Because he gets a good reputation for calling his guests idiotic slow brained morons who are luck-boxing because the market is doing nothing but going up.mschmitt wrote:After Cramer called Lenny Dykstra (now bankrupt and in jail) one of the great ones in the business, I don't know why anybody would listen to what he says. Let alone invest money on it.
It matters not that he is uber nice to his guests.
- Thu Aug 09, 2012 3:45 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: College Bubble Popping
- Replies: 72
- Views: 8015
Re: College Bubble Popping
Colleges aren't a waste of money and they aren't failing our kids.
Whats happening is a bell curve in the need for a lot of highly educated people. As automation grew, so did the need for newer and higher educated people to build these new things and understand them, there were also a lot of people on the maintenance end as these new machines grew. It was symbiotic.
That "building" is slowing down so there is less of a need for highly educated people to keep it going as well as efficiency and stability so there is less of a need for "grease monkey" type jobs that are nothing but grunts. The grunts have to become more educated as well - but those types of jobs don't require $50k and 4 years.
Whats happening is a bell curve in the need for a lot of highly educated people. As automation grew, so did the need for newer and higher educated people to build these new things and understand them, there were also a lot of people on the maintenance end as these new machines grew. It was symbiotic.
That "building" is slowing down so there is less of a need for highly educated people to keep it going as well as efficiency and stability so there is less of a need for "grease monkey" type jobs that are nothing but grunts. The grunts have to become more educated as well - but those types of jobs don't require $50k and 4 years.
- Tue Aug 07, 2012 9:50 pm
- Forum: Personal Investments
- Topic: Candlestick graphs
- Replies: 2
- Views: 617
Re: Candlestick graphs
You aren't going to be able to tell whether any kind of pattern is related to a pension fund, an institution or some very large individual mover or just some other activity. The candlestick by itself is meaningless. *volume* speaks more about the meaning and sustainability of a move.
- Fri Aug 03, 2012 7:37 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Are ETFs turning investors into day traders?
- Replies: 20
- Views: 2561
Re: Are ETFs turning investors into day traders?
Because while an investor wants to bet on say, solar, they don't trust themselves picking stocks so now they can turn to a sector ETF to get the play they want. It used to only be possible with mutual funds that cost a boat load to buy and sell and some had redemption fees on top.AndroAsc wrote:The argument here is nonsensical. How does ETF turn investor into day traders? It's the person's mentality that turn them into day traders, not the product.
So yes, those who wanted to day trade before did not because it was definitely prohibitively expensive. Now not so much.
- Thu Aug 02, 2012 11:28 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Are ETFs turning investors into day traders?
- Replies: 20
- Views: 2561
Re: Are ETFs turning investors into day traders?
If someone is trying to day trade with a mere $2500 then they deserve to lose out.
- Mon Jul 30, 2012 8:17 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Are ETFs turning investors into day traders?
- Replies: 20
- Views: 2561
Re: Are ETFs turning investors into day traders?
What do you consider "very high" leverage?
When I was dinking around in late 2008 and 2009 TDA gave me something like 3.5x assets. More than enough to turn a paltry 1% or even .5% into a decent one days wage.
It ended up being the triple leveraged ETF's FAS and FAZ that convinced me to cut it out. Didn't help I kept betting mostly against the Financials after March 2009...oops
When I was dinking around in late 2008 and 2009 TDA gave me something like 3.5x assets. More than enough to turn a paltry 1% or even .5% into a decent one days wage.
It ended up being the triple leveraged ETF's FAS and FAZ that convinced me to cut it out. Didn't help I kept betting mostly against the Financials after March 2009...oops
- Wed Jul 18, 2012 9:29 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Does Buffett know something you don't?
- Replies: 25
- Views: 4413
Re: Does Buffett know something you don't?
That is utterly and totally irrelevant.talzara wrote:VTSMX is priced at net asset value at the end of every day. BRK isn't. At any point in time, BRK's stock price may be overvalued, fairly-valued, or undervalued.Roy wrote:As of a few weeks ago, BRK.A and VTSMX had similar 10-year returns. I think Buffet's main advantages lie in his ability to structure deals that ordinary guys cannot.
DUCY?
- Mon Jul 16, 2012 9:21 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Vanguard asks, "ETFs: Still the bargain they used to be?"
- Replies: 25
- Views: 3335
Re: Vanguard asks, "ETFs: Still the bargain they used to be?
Article title is disingenuous and eye-catchy - no different then a headline out of CNBC that goes for clicks.
But I guess thats what it takes....
But I guess thats what it takes....
- Thu Jul 12, 2012 10:56 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Explain "New Money" Premiums
- Replies: 19
- Views: 1730
Re: Explain "New Money" Premiums
The banks want a higher AUM but not have to pay for it.
- Thu Jul 12, 2012 9:16 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Dow 6,000 without the Fed
- Replies: 16
- Views: 3049
Re: Dow 6,000 without the Fed
It will only be arbitraged away if the retail lemming investor clues in or goes away. That won't happen anytime soon.Jack wrote:RenoJay wrote:If this effect is real, it is surprising that more traders haven't recognized it and arbitraged it away, but it should quickly disappear now that it is out in the open.
- Thu Jul 12, 2012 7:30 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Dow 6,000 without the Fed
- Replies: 16
- Views: 3049
Re: Dow 6,000 without the Fed
Yah because they're sure cherry picking dates out of the total blueCaliJim wrote:The report is data mining at its best.
Also this was already brought up http://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtop ... 10&t=99344
- Thu Jul 12, 2012 8:18 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: 80% of equity premium in 24 hours pre FOMC announcements
- Replies: 11
- Views: 1575
Re: 80% of equity premium in 24 hours pre FOMC announcements
So instead of removing the day that actually has made the biggest difference (the positive days), you want to remove the days that are what is likely the biggest negative response?
The fact the include and exclude graphs are nearly identical otherwise, just shifted down starting in the 90's, should be evidence enough that the pre-FOMC rise heavily outweighs the post-FOMC fall. If you remove the post-FOMC fall, the graph is going to look like the S&P is probably 3000.
Also, the New York Fed graph isn't an average. Its not a + or -. It is literally taking data out of dataset.
The fact the include and exclude graphs are nearly identical otherwise, just shifted down starting in the 90's, should be evidence enough that the pre-FOMC rise heavily outweighs the post-FOMC fall. If you remove the post-FOMC fall, the graph is going to look like the S&P is probably 3000.
Also, the New York Fed graph isn't an average. Its not a + or -. It is literally taking data out of dataset.
- Wed Jul 11, 2012 6:25 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: 80% of equity premium in 24 hours pre FOMC announcements
- Replies: 11
- Views: 1575
Re: 80% of equity premium in 24 hours pre FOMC announcements
The data needs to be teased a bit more. I would like to see two 3 day charts; one chart for the days when the market was up at the end of the day after the FOMC report - and one chart for the days when the market was down at the end of the day after the FOMC report. There is no doubt that some investors may correctly guess the general tone of the report, but it is strange that they would wait for the morning of the report to act. On the other hand, recipients of leaks would not have much advanced notice. Now as to the length of women's skirts.... :) Dale So...what are you asking for? A chart of the returns of the ~444 days in the last 18.5 years that match your description? What would that prove? This data set is sufficient to see how cruc...
- Wed Jul 11, 2012 9:06 am
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: 80% of equity premium in 24 hours pre FOMC announcements
- Replies: 11
- Views: 1575
Re: 80% of equity premium in 24 hours pre FOMC announcements
Beat me to it! Of course, I was going to provide a link to the http://www.zerohedge.com/news/chart-year-fed-has-doubled-sp-admits-fed article on it as oooo its much more conspiracy ladden. This is quite an interesting "data mine". Take away the consistently known 24 hour period ahead of the Federal Open Market Committee announcements and the gains in the stock market vanish. I didn't read the article closely but this is just the S&P on a price change, right? Not as an investment with reinvested dividends? ---- What would be interesting is doing the same sort of thing with some individual stocks. Take out the 24 hours before earnings etc. But its waaay more interesting, to me, that the "market" as a whole reacts so st...
- Mon Jul 09, 2012 12:34 pm
- Forum: Investing - Theory, News & General
- Topic: Does investing in REIT reflect leverage benefits?
- Replies: 5
- Views: 857
Re: Does investing in REIT reflect leverage benefits?
Unless there is a corresponding or higher increase in wages, inflation isn't going to change anything because people still won't be able to buy a house because it, along with everything else, will simply cost more.
No one is holding off buying because housing prices aren't higher...that makes no sense. Prices will start going up when people start buying because they can actually afford to.
No one is holding off buying because housing prices aren't higher...that makes no sense. Prices will start going up when people start buying because they can actually afford to.