Your mind has been corrupted by the Israeli Lobby. You are a puppet of the Establishment. You are a loser.
Your mind has been corrupted by the Israeli Lobby. You are a puppet of the Establishment. You are a loser.
Seeker9 wrote:
Your mind has been corrupted by the Israeli Lobby. You are a puppet of the Establishment. You are a loser.
Thank you so kindly, stranger. I was lost but now I am found.
I am forever in your debt.
Grouper wrote:
The dollars don't disappear, but they're not yours anymore. You've traded them for stock. The company now has your dollars and they are using them to support their business.
Smoked. wrote:
So, you're claiming that if I go buy Wal-Mart stock next week, I get stock, and my dollars go to the Wal-Mart?
Of course. What did you think happened?
Jotille wrote:
Grouper wrote:The dollars don't disappear, but they're not yours anymore. You've traded them for stock. The company now has your dollars and they are using them to support their business.
Smoked. wrote:
So, you're claiming that if I go buy Wal-Mart stock next week, I get stock, and my dollars go to the Wal-Mart?
Of course. What did you think happened?
Hopefully you are joking because that is not at all how it works.
pennman wrote:
Hopefully you are joking because that is not at all how it works.
Educate me, please.
Jotille wrote:
pennman wrote:Hopefully you are joking because that is not at all how it works.
Educate me, please.
Wal-Mart received their money long before you or I would have bought their shares. We are buying the shares that are traded in the secondary market. If you go and purchase 10000 shares of Wal-Mart tomorrow, they don't get a single penny for them. They have already received their money for the shares through the public offerings.
Think of it like buying a used car. If you buy a used Honda, how much of the sale proceeds go to Honda?
a common psychological 'explanation' of conspiracy hacks like yourself is that they feel lost in life and need an overarching formula to make the world seem ordered and controlled.
Just curious, since you are an example of a wack conspiracy theorist - tell me about your life - do you feel lost? Do you long for order? Do you feel your life has any point? Do you desperately WANT someone to be in charge?
agip wrote:
a common psychological 'explanation' of conspiracy hacks like yourself is that they feel lost in life and need an overarching formula to make the world seem ordered and controlled.
Just curious, since you are an example of a wack conspiracy theorist - tell me about your life - do you feel lost? Do you long for order? Do you feel your life has any point? Do you desperately WANT someone to be in charge?
What exactly are you disputing in my statements?
I get that you don't like what I have to say and feel a need to discredit the messenger. But what in my message do you factually dispute?
buybuybaby wrote:
Wal-Mart received their money long before you or I would have bought their shares. We are buying the shares that are traded in the secondary market. If you go and purchase 10000 shares of Wal-Mart tomorrow, they don't get a single penny for them. They have already received their money for the shares through the public offerings.
Think of it like buying a used car. If you buy a used Honda, how much of the sale proceeds go to Honda?
Thank you for that clear and concise explanation. I appreciate it.
buybuybaby wrote:
Wal-Mart received their money long before you or I would have bought their shares. We are buying the shares that are traded in the secondary market. If you go and purchase 10000 shares of Wal-Mart tomorrow, they don't get a single penny for them. They have already received their money for the shares through the public offerings.
Think of it like buying a used car. If you buy a used Honda, how much of the sale proceeds go to Honda?
It's amazing that people are allowed to post on any topic they want but don't have a clue about even the basics of what they are talking about.
The stock market and how it all works is a prime example. buybuybaby, don't even attempt to explain to these idiots how IPOs work. They'll never understand.
PS, you should have explained that corporations will retained some of their issued stock invarious classes, and that in the initial offering the existing owners will often have their equity converted into stock (think Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, Phil Knight, etc) which they will almost always hold onto.
Jotille wrote:
buybuybaby wrote:Wal-Mart received their money long before you or I would have bought their shares. We are buying the shares that are traded in the secondary market. If you go and purchase 10000 shares of Wal-Mart tomorrow, they don't get a single penny for them. They have already received their money for the shares through the public offerings.
Think of it like buying a used car. If you buy a used Honda, how much of the sale proceeds go to Honda?
Thank you for that clear and concise explanation. I appreciate it.
Nice job 'buybuybaby'. It does my heart good to see folks post clear and concise explanations here, free of any putdowns.
Recognizer of Brilliance wrote:
Nice job 'buybuybaby'. It does my heart good to see folks post clear and concise explanations here, free of any putdowns.
Except it's not entirely correct. Yes, IPO shares have long since been sold by the company (and while IPO shares transferred to management may indeed be held, those transferred to VC firms are often sold quickly). But companies do themselves increase the number of shares permitted and sell secondary shares on the market...and companies sometimes buy back shares from the market. Companies will sometimes buy back shares if they think the amount of cash they're holding will make them a takeover target, and they will sometimes increase shares to raise cash (or the amount of stock available) to take over another company.
Unless the company is literally at the maximum number of shares permitted by the Board of Directors, you really don't know who you are buying the shares from.
Pablo Picasso wrote:
It's amazing that people are allowed to post on any topic they want but don't have a clue about even the basics of what they are talking about.
The stock market and how it all works is a prime example.
Are you suggesting that you know EVERYTHING about the workings of the stock market?
Nutty wrote:
[quote]Pablo Picasso wrote:
Are you suggesting that you know EVERYTHING about the workings of the stock market?
Sure. It's a Casino and we ain't the house
BoJax wrote:
Nutty wrote:[quote]Pablo Picasso wrote:
Are you suggesting that you know EVERYTHING about the workings of the stock market?
Sure. It's a Casino and we ain't the house
Thus demonstrating that you know NOTHING about the workings of the stock market.
Congratulations!
Pointing out the Obvious wrote:
BoJax wrote:Sure. It's a Casino and we ain't the house
Thus demonstrating that you know NOTHING about the workings of the stock market.
Congratulations!
So says yet another sheep waiting to be sheared (and soon).
When are you guys going to wake up and what is so obvious?
The game is rigged.
Pointing out the Obvious wrote:
BoJax wrote:Sure. It's a Casino and we ain't the house
Thus demonstrating that you know NOTHING about the workings of the stock market.
Congratulations!
Actually, his interpretation is accurate for many people's approach to the stock market. So he does know SOMETHING. Of course, it is just part of the picture.
If you consider the idea that in the short term, the stock market is a voting machine, and in the long term it is a weighing machine....
... He is describing the short term.
Most people never get past the short term idea, and look at stocks as squiggly lines on a graph. They miss out because they don't make the connection that there are businesses with operations and earnings/losses behind every squiggly line.
He deserves some credit. The "we ain't the house" comment is very insightful.
coach d wrote:
Except it's not entirely correct. Yes, IPO shares have long since been sold by the company (and while IPO shares transferred to management may indeed be held, those transferred to VC firms are often sold quickly). But companies do themselves increase the number of shares permitted and sell secondary shares on the market...and companies sometimes buy back shares from the market. Companies will sometimes buy back shares if they think the amount of cash they're holding will make them a takeover target, and they will sometimes increase shares to raise cash (or the amount of stock available) to take over another company.
Unless the company is literally at the maximum number of shares permitted by the Board of Directors, you really don't know who you are buying the shares from.
To add to this, in the Wal-Mart example (which was my original question), we DO know that we are not buying the shares from the company. In recent years, Wal-Mart has not only NOT been issuing new shares, but also actively repurchasing their shares, effectively taking them off the market and reducing outstanding available shares. Effectively... the opposite of a secondary stock offering.
And, though it was mentioned before, kudos to buybuybaby for an excellent explanation and analogy.
Smoked. wrote:
Pointing out the Obvious wrote:Thus demonstrating that you know NOTHING about the workings of the stock market.
Congratulations!
Actually, his interpretation is accurate for many people's approach to the stock market. So he does know SOMETHING. Of course, it is just part of the picture.
If you consider the idea that in the short term, the stock market is a voting machine, and in the long term it is a weighing machine....
... He is describing the short term.
Most people never get past the short term idea, and look at stocks as squiggly lines on a graph. They miss out because they don't make the connection that there are businesses with operations and earnings/losses behind every squiggly line.
He deserves some credit. The "we ain't the house" comment is very insightful.
Well, yeah, except for the fact that:
1) It 'aint' a casino.
and
2) If you are going to make the casino analogy then the only reasonable way to look at it is that we ARE the house.