But what about....Quote:
Originally Posted by byates1
fuck off.
Printable View
But what about....Quote:
Originally Posted by byates1
fuck off.
How am i supporting Russia?Quote:
Originally Posted by garyfromterrace
The shares were already issued, so the Russian company doesn't get any of my money.
I buy the shares from another investor.
Sent from my moto g 5G using Tapatalk
He's right thoughQuote:
Originally Posted by garyfromterrace
Sent from my moto g 5G using Tapatalk
^^You in the right thread??
The post Cold War era of the last three decades is over. That means in all likelihood the world probably won’t experience widespread political peace between major powers. This could be a tectonic shift to a new landscape that will impact how people invest for decades. If folks are invested in China, for example, they could quickly end up rug pulled the way Rod was with Russia.
The irony of having to point out geopolitical risks--afterwards, no less--to people who read zerohedge is, to be technically precise, amazeballs.
I agree 100%. Lots of tail risk.Quote:
Originally Posted by MultiVerse
The risk with China is that us will sanction the adrs. I should all my Chinese oil companies, actually i just had two.
Great dividends, but i didn't want to go thru the same issues i had with the Russian adrs.
Sent from my moto g 5G using Tapatalk
However, thru interactive brokers you can buy honk kong stocks, so you bypass somewhat the adr risk.
And please, don't make this into a political issue.
Sent from my moto g 5G using Tapatalk
I mean, the big risk with China is that CCP just decides to take the company and tell foreign owners to fuck off. Or just change the leadership. Or the rules of the marketplace.
Regardless of politics it's risky.
Forget about politics or wars, the place is corrupt. Like different people claiming the same assets corrupt. fiduciary is the family running the business, not shareholders.
As a non-professional seeking market news/information (not investing advice), I'll echo that Bloomberg is great. Very expensive, but I also like the Financial Times.
What's the over/under on the Fed moving its target inflation rate to 3-4% by the end of 2023? Seems like by the end of 2024 is more than 50-50?
3-4% as a target doesn't seem like an acceptable rate with current calculation methodologies that many feel have undercounted inflation effects for many years
It would be better to say "we can't meet the target through acceptable means" than to say "we are fine with 3-4%"
But I'm not a macro guru
The Fed will just say the long term trajectory of inflation is well within our target of 2%. If it ever does reach 2%, which it will imo, they will probably remove inflation as a target and be “data dependent”.
They don’t even have a target anymore. It’s now a range. Or target range. Whatever.Quote:
Originally Posted by 4matic
Long term structural factors are still disinflationary
Chances they move inflation target to 3-4%: 0/10
I think the mantra "timing the market doesn't work"comes from investment banks and advisors who don't make money unless you're invested.
However, deciding to hedge or get out when valuations are high is not timing.
Quote from one of the greatest investors:
"Decades ago, the famed value investor Benjamin Graham wrote, “The habit of relating what is paid to what is being offered is an invaluable trait in investment. We are convinced that the average investor cannot deal successfully with price movements by endeavoring to forecast them. Our recommended policy has, however, made provision for changes in the proportion of common stocks to bonds in the portfolio, if the investor chooses to do so, according as the level of stock prices appears less or more attractive by value standards. That sounds like timing; but when you consider it you will see that it is not really timing at all, but rather the purchase and sale of securities by the method of valuation.”
Btw for at least 15 yes, stocks returned less then t bills starting in 1998, even with two years of great returns till 2000.
Sent from my moto g 5G using Tapatalk
...https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...d5602c1a19.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by rod9301
The stock market is a zero sum game. For every winner, there's a loser. So we need people to think they can time the market and lose (continually) in order for the rest of us to not time the market and win.Quote:
Originally Posted by skaredshtles
This sure looks like the sum is increasing over time:Quote:
Originally Posted by Name Redacted
Attachment 449611
Trying to beat the market returns is zero sum, if you want to call it that, but anyone can just buy and hold the broad market and expect to see positive returns.
There are some true financial WIZARDS in this thread.
:fmicon:
That's what I was getting at. But if everyone just bought and held indefinitely, it wouldn't be as exciting as your chart there.Quote:
Originally Posted by J. Barron DeJong
Missing the stock market’s 10 best days over the last 30 years cuts your return in half. And 80% of the markets best days occur during bear markets.Quote:
Originally Posted by rod9301
But I’m sure you’ve beaten the market with timing and T-bills.
One of my stocks went up over 30% today, that was nice to see. Too bad it's still under a dollar but I have next to nothing into it because I took out the principal years ago then bought more under 50 cents recently. ABML reported that the lithium deposit on their claims is one of the biggest ever in the US and they're starting mining asap and their processing facility is also getting ready to come online. If you're into penny stocks it might be worth getting some of this.
Penny stock mining companies based in Nevada. Same as it ever was.
Yes but they also have a refining facility at their battery metal recycling plant which is just about to go fully active. Most miners don't have anything more than just the mining operation.
"Inferred Resource
Inferred mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of limited geological evidence and sampling. The level of geological uncertainty associated with an inferred mineral resource is too high to apply relevant technical and economic factors likely to influence the prospects of economic extraction in a manner useful for evaluation of economic viability. Because an inferred mineral resource has the lowest level of geological confidence of all mineral resources, which prevents the application of the modifying factors in a manner useful for evaluation of economic viability, an inferred mineral resource may not be considered when assessing the economic viability of a mining project, and may not be converted to a mineral reserve."
The fine print on their website...
When looking at Google maps there is no activity whatsoever where they say they are developing. If this was an actual project you'd think you'd be able to see some trucks or something out there. About 20 years ago I worked for a guy who had relatives that would pay him a couple thousand dollars to use his name on a board of directors for some of these "mining companies." It was all a scam, pump and dump and the company would go out of business.
Not saying that shit is a scam, but I wouldn't put my money into it. I bought a few penny stocks when I first started investing, lost money on all of them. Vowed not to fall for that shit again.
Is now the time for everyone who has "potential bank contagion" on their 2023 economic bingo card to mark that box?
It’s only systemic if you think a bank with a $1 billion dollar wine loan portfolio, and a bunch of shitty startups, is broadly linked
No way, I read that all the BIG banks are very capitalized and diversified in their holdings. The smaller banks are at risk though. More consolidation coming...Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevo
Unbelievable this Silicon Valley bank lost its ass in treasuries. Can’t believe they do not hedge that shit.
If that’s the standard, more to come.
Per SVIB
If you owned a 2% bond and new bonds were paying 4%, who would buy your bond if you needed to sell before it matured?
Banking system is exceptionally strong right now:
Attachment 451264
https://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2...ecord.html?m=1
One small bank making some bad bets on treasuries isn’t going to take down the system.
I'm over here selling puts today, hoping for an afternoon rebound. If not, I'll be in stuff a lot cheaper than a few days ago.
My wife works (worked) for SVB. Not a good morning.
CEO sold 12,000 shares last week (ain’t that illegal?)
Hopeful now that FDIC took over she’ll at least get her final paycheck.
Why are they taking a position?Quote:
Originally Posted by LeeLau
It's really odd that a run happened at all? The loss is substantial, but not debilitating. I'm wondering if tech's recent history with the crypto markets has clouded everyone's judgement in regards to the resiliency of certain banks. SVB is not FTX, but I'm guessing a lot of tech folks aren't waiting around to see what happens.
@AK That sucks. Hope it works out.
I'm sure the selling is just a big coincidence.
Hopefully not. If they all were, we’d be bartering with our bodies after last yrs treasury dump.Quote:
Originally Posted by J. Barron DeJong
I take it all back, we’re doomed:Quote:
Originally Posted by Cono Este
Attachment 451269
Attachment 451273Quote:
Originally Posted by Stu Gotz