Of course it is wrote:
Investing 101 wrote:
An investment is not money. It can be sold for money, but it is not money in and of itself.
Of course it is.
You guys are truly nuts.
Another massacre in the market today
Good luck buying a car with your stocks and bonds.
U. R. Stupid wrote:
Of course it is wrote:
Of course it is.
You guys are truly nuts.
Another massacre in the market today
Good luck buying a car with your stocks and bonds.
At least some Subway Sandwich shops accept bitcoin. Just thought i would point that out.
U. R. Stupid wrote:
Of course it is wrote:
Of course it is.
You guys are truly nuts.
Another massacre in the market today
Good luck buying a car with your stocks and bonds.
Yes because it's so hard to turn those into cash.
You remind me of the opening of The Fifth. Dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb.
So hard wrote:
U. R. Stupid wrote:
Good luck buying a car with your stocks and bonds.
Yes because it's so hard to turn those into cash.
You remind me of the opening of The Fifth. Dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb.
That’s the point. As another poster said, an investment is not money, but can be exchanged for money.
This is the quote which is fueling the debate: "Markets getting hammered again today. Even with limited exposure the past two weeks have cost me several thousand dollars. I imagine you guys much more heavily invested in stocks have not lost anything somehow. You never do. Always up up up in your world (mind)."
Aside from the poster insinuating about "you guys" being disingenuous about the true nature of your profit/losses, it may be said that yes, with markets down, an investor may either have a reduction of their unrealized gains for some duration of time, and may even be in the red (current value of their investment is worth less than their initial deposit). Technically that is not a loss in either case until the investor liquidates their investment by closing out the position.
The root of the issue is that downturns like those of the last few sessions (in some indices) are exactly that - downturns of some unknown duration. Many long term investors see these as temporary. Other bears may seem them as indicative of someone taking a loss. But if a long term investor rides out a downturn in order to sell later at a profit when the market rebounds, then no loss is accrued. In some cases, the rebound may be in a few days or weeks, and other times it might take years.
Some here have been accustomed to "cherry picking" durations of the market when it has been on a downward trajectory as proof that investing in general is a losing proposition. Others note that markets fluctuate and trends in both directions are to be expected and that an investor should have their investment strategy positioned so as to be able to wait out the inevitable downturns.
With that said, next week should be interesting.
seattle prattle wrote:
This is the quote which is fueling the debate: "Markets getting hammered again today. Even with limited exposure the past two weeks have cost me several thousand dollars. I imagine you guys much more heavily invested in stocks have not lost anything somehow. You never do. Always up up up in your world (mind)."
Aside from the poster insinuating about "you guys" being disingenuous about the true nature of your profit/losses, it may be said that yes, with markets down, an investor may either have a reduction of their unrealized gains for some duration of time, and may even be in the red (current value of their investment is worth less than their initial deposit). Technically that is not a loss in either case until the investor liquidates their investment by closing out the position.
The root of the issue is that downturns like those of the last few sessions (in some indices) are exactly that - downturns of some unknown duration. Many long term investors see these as temporary. Other bears may seem them as indicative of someone taking a loss. But if a long term investor rides out a downturn in order to sell later at a profit when the market rebounds, then no loss is accrued. In some cases, the rebound may be in a few days or weeks, and other times it might take years.
Some here have been accustomed to "cherry picking" durations of the market when it has been on a downward trajectory as proof that investing in general is a losing proposition. Others note that markets fluctuate and trends in both directions are to be expected and that an investor should have their investment strategy positioned so as to be able to wait out the inevitable downturns.
With that said, next week should be interesting.
Rational posts are in short supply in this thread. Thank you for bucking the trend.
Certainly not Igy wrote:
seattle prattle wrote:
This is the quote which is fueling the debate: "Markets getting hammered again today. Even with limited exposure the past two weeks have cost me several thousand dollars. I imagine you guys much more heavily invested in stocks have not lost anything somehow. You never do. Always up up up in your world (mind)."
Aside from the poster insinuating about "you guys" being disingenuous about the true nature of your profit/losses, it may be said that yes, with markets down, an investor may either have a reduction of their unrealized gains for some duration of time, and may even be in the red (current value of their investment is worth less than their initial deposit). Technically that is not a loss in either case until the investor liquidates their investment by closing out the position.
The root of the issue is that downturns like those of the last few sessions (in some indices) are exactly that - downturns of some unknown duration. Many long term investors see these as temporary. Other bears may seem them as indicative of someone taking a loss. But if a long term investor rides out a downturn in order to sell later at a profit when the market rebounds, then no loss is accrued. In some cases, the rebound may be in a few days or weeks, and other times it might take years.
Some here have been accustomed to "cherry picking" durations of the market when it has been on a downward trajectory as proof that investing in general is a losing proposition. Others note that markets fluctuate and trends in both directions are to be expected and that an investor should have their investment strategy positioned so as to be able to wait out the inevitable downturns.
With that said, next week should be interesting.
Rational posts are in short supply in this thread. Thank you for bucking the trend.
Of course this comment ignores valuation as a component for making investment decision and uses recent history as a weathervane for future returns. The former is informative and the later not.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Certainly not Igy wrote:
Rational posts are in short supply in this thread. Thank you for bucking the trend.
Of course this comment ignores valuation as a component for making investment decision and uses recent history as a weathervane for future returns. The former is informative and the later not.
Determining the weighted importance of valuation within the current economic environment is open to debate. But regardless of the weight an investor would give to that criteria, a decision to buy, sell, or hold would be largely influenced or determined by their investment horizon.
An investment decision based solely on valuation with little or no regard for the unique market and economic dynamics of the last several years would have resulted in an investor missing out on a rather lengthy period of market appreciation. And in some cases, it did.
seattle prattle wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Of course this comment ignores valuation as a component for making investment decision and uses recent history as a weathervane for future returns. The former is informative and the later not.
Determining the weighted importance of valuation within the current economic environment is open to debate. But regardless of the weight an investor would give to that criteria, a decision to buy, sell, or hold would be largely influenced or determined by their investment horizon.
An investment decision based solely on valuation with little or no regard for the unique market and economic dynamics of the last several years would have resulted in an investor missing out on a rather lengthy period of market appreciation. And in some cases, it did.
Of course your view is based on recency bias. We will see how that works out. In most cases it won’t.
Certainly not Igy wrote:
seattle prattle wrote:
This is the quote which is fueling the debate: "Markets getting hammered again today. Even with limited exposure the past two weeks have cost me several thousand dollars. I imagine you guys much more heavily invested in stocks have not lost anything somehow. You never do. Always up up up in your world (mind)."
Aside from the poster insinuating about "you guys" being disingenuous about the true nature of your profit/losses, it may be said that yes, with markets down, an investor may either have a reduction of their unrealized gains for some duration of time, and may even be in the red (current value of their investment is worth less than their initial deposit). Technically that is not a loss in either case until the investor liquidates their investment by closing out the position.
The root of the issue is that downturns like those of the last few sessions (in some indices) are exactly that - downturns of some unknown duration. Many long term investors see these as temporary. Other bears may seem them as indicative of someone taking a loss. But if a long term investor rides out a downturn in order to sell later at a profit when the market rebounds, then no loss is accrued. In some cases, the rebound may be in a few days or weeks, and other times it might take years.
Some here have been accustomed to "cherry picking" durations of the market when it has been on a downward trajectory as proof that investing in general is a losing proposition. Others note that markets fluctuate and trends in both directions are to be expected and that an investor should have their investment strategy positioned so as to be able to wait out the inevitable downturns.
With that said, next week should be interesting.
Rational posts are in short supply in this thread. Thank you for bucking the trend.
Oh! I bet you're fooling a lot of people with that clever handle complimenting your best bud.
And you wonder why people take your post as a joke.
seattle prattle wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Of course this comment ignores valuation as a component for making investment decision and uses recent history as a weathervane for future returns. The former is informative and the later not.
Determining the weighted importance of valuation within the current economic environment is open to debate. But regardless of the weight an investor would give to that criteria, a decision to buy, sell, or hold would be largely influenced or determined by their investment horizon.
An investment decision based solely on valuation with little or no regard for the unique market and economic dynamics of the last several years would have resulted in an investor missing out on a rather lengthy period of market appreciation. And in some cases, it did.
Agreed. Valuation is an important metric, but it’s not the only one. It may not even be the most important.
Myopic investors like GOI, though, cannot see the forest for the trees which is why they will always be taking up the rear.
Just like the Blackberry, your portfolio will go back to year 2000.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Just like the Blackberry, your portfolio will go back to year 2000.
No, it won’t.
Blackberry wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Just like the Blackberry, your portfolio will go back to year 2000.
No, it won’t.
Why not?
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Blackberry wrote:
No, it won’t.
Why not?
Becuase i was smart enough to buy Apple?
And before you start about it's valuation, the valuation when i bought it was significantly less than the current valuation.
You also own Russell 3x Up down 5% since I warned you, add that to your preferred. All going lower including your Apple. Guaranteed down hard, but not necessarily next week or next month, but next year. You will see soon enough. Sorry for the bad news.
Hussman tell you that?
Nope, Shiller, Buffett, Hussman and Tobin. All valuation metrics that are historically reliable. You really should read more.
https://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/2018/10/02/market-remains-overvaluedseattle prattle wrote:
Hussman tell you that?
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
You also own Russell 3x Up down 5% since I warned you, add that to your preferred. All going lower including your Apple. Guaranteed down hard, but not necessarily next week or next month, but next year. You will see soon enough. Sorry for the bad news.
You’ve been saying the same thing literally for years. Eventually things will go down, but no one knows when so stop with the empty promises. You’re a joke.