Down goes the Dow

Trews wrote:

If You wrote:

That way you can critique others and claim great returns after the fact. You have no thoughts on the future market. Very courageous

If you want to see "courageous" thoughts on the future, check out the posts here by 'Ghost of Igloi'. That guy has yet to have an original thought or make a concrete prediction.

I see what you mean.

If You wrote:

That way you can critique others and claim great returns after the fact. You have no thoughts on the future market. Very courageous

? ?

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Earnie wrote:

???

Earnie(ings) FactCheck:

FactSet uses inflated non-GAAP EPS and ESTIMATES in their numbers.

Non-GAAP numbers are preferred by Warren Buffett.

Financial Advisor wrote:

Non-GAAP numbers are preferred by Warren Buffett.

Who cares. ?

Trews wrote:

If You wrote:

That way you can critique others and claim great returns after the fact. You have no thoughts on the future market. Very courageous

If you want to see "courageous" thoughts on the future, check out the posts here by 'Ghost of Igloi'. That guy has yet to have an original thought or make a concrete prediction.

Actually unlike you groupthink lemmings he has made predictions.

Financial DisAdvisor wrote:

Financial Advisor wrote:

Non-GAAP numbers are preferred by Warren Buffett.

Who cares. ?

I would think that savvy investors would be interested in what WB says.

Tokyo Thorn wrote:

Trews wrote:

If you want to see "courageous" thoughts on the future, check out the posts here by 'Ghost of Igloi'. That guy has yet to have an original thought or make a concrete prediction.

Actually unlike you groupthink lemmings he has made predictions.

Yeah, April 1. LOL.

Financial Advisor wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Earnie(ings) FactCheck:

FactSet uses inflated non-GAAP EPS and ESTIMATES in their numbers.

Non-GAAP numbers are preferred by Warren Buffett.

The good old boy uncle that serves as front man for a quazi-GSE. Of course getting sweetheart deals to bail out GS and BOA. Now holds highest levels of cash equivalent years.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Financial Advisor wrote:

Non-GAAP numbers are preferred by Warren Buffett.

The good old boy uncle that serves as front man for a quazi-GSE. Of course getting sweetheart deals to bail out GS and BOA. Now holds highest levels of cash equivalent years.

That's quite a roundabout way of saying he's a smart guy. I agree.

Question for people who know securities fraud.

Rihanna posted something bad about snapchat and the stock fell 4%. Can celebrities short a stock and then post about how much it sucks and cash out hard? And what about the reverse. Can someone who's young and hip with the kids buy a ton of stock and then post about how great it is and then sell when it inevitably soars 5%, or would that be like a pump and dump sort of?

If they are posting and acting upon the news in advance to get a trading advantage, and the gain is large enough, sure. Yes, all would qualify as pump and dump. Regulators are looking at large transactions.

Financial Advisor wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

The good old boy uncle that serves as front man for a quazi-GSE. Of course getting sweetheart deals to bail out GS and BOA. Now holds highest levels of cash equivalent years.

That's quite a roundabout way of saying he's a smart guy. I agree.

Yea, and if you are smart you would be wise to look at what he does rather than says. He’s a carnival barker filling his orders via muppets.

Tokyo Thorn wrote:

Trews wrote:

If you want to see "courageous" thoughts on the future, check out the posts here by 'Ghost of Igloi'. That guy has yet to have an original thought or make a concrete prediction.

Actually unlike you groupthink lemmings he has made predictions.

Are you seriously trying to counter the point that Igy has no original thoughts with one that others here are "groupthink lemmings?" Do you think before you type?

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

If they are posting and acting upon the news in advance to get a trading advantage, and the gain is large enough, sure. Yes, all would qualify as pump and dump. Regulators are looking at large transactions.

I mean say Kanye West (do young people still like him? idk) shorts a ton of Snapchat stock and then posts on Instagram how much it sucks. Presumably, Snapchat would lose 3-5% so he'd be able to cash out big time just by making a social media post about a company he isn't even associated with. There's gotta be some First Amendment thing in there somewhere right? It's not like he's Snapchat's CEO.

If anyone banks serious cash the regulators will claw back and fine.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

seattle prattle wrote:

which brings me to the essential point. A directional prediction (i.e.: 67% downturn) is not much of a prediction unless you say when it is to occur. If you can't approximate the timing, it can do as much harm as good. And the last 3 years are a case in point.

Seattle,

And I will say what I said before, the timing is less important. The operative point is valuation. At even higher valuation prospective return drops lower. You and others believe there is some buffer in a rise market. Historically that is not true.

Igy

So, you recommend basing investment decisions primarily on valuation. But shouldn't the current and near-term economic environment be taken into consideration? In an unusually favorable economic cycle, maybe future earning projections are justifiably higher. Like, oh i don't know, due to favorable tax law revisions, easing of business regulations, etc...

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Financial Advisor wrote:

That's quite a roundabout way of saying he's a smart guy. I agree.

Yea, and if you are smart you would be wise to look at what he does rather than says. He’s a carnival barker filling his orders via muppets.

I’m smart enough to watch and listen. It’s unwise to shut out potentially valuable information.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

If anyone banks serious cash the regulators will claw back and fine.

Seems kind of dumb. If a company is realistically and reasonably valued then one would think it would not be purely subject to such wild swings from social media posts by celebrities who very likely know exactly nothing regarding the health of the company including its debt, cash on hand, future outlook, etc.

Ladybird wrote:

I would think that savvy investors would be interested in what WB says.

Maybe savvy "Billionaires." ☝️?