Sanrith Descartes
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
- 45,824
- 126,503
Investing General Discussion
- Thread starter Furious
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Sanrith Descartes
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
- 45,824
- 126,503
Realistically, if you own indexes its very difficult to not own big tech. Not impossible, but really hard.
Burns
Avatar of War Slayer
- 7,652
- 14,936
Yarp, it's hard to have high morals if you want to make money on the stock market. I was mostly joking, but I really do feel dirty profiting off of such companies. So I will stick to index funds, where I have a much smaller slice of the pie.
Also, all tech is not made the same. It seems that Facebook pushed it's agenda with it's algos in a much more successful way over Google. Facebook also seems to be harming children in a way Google couldn't even dream of.
Also, all tech is not made the same. It seems that Facebook pushed it's agenda with it's algos in a much more successful way over Google. Facebook also seems to be harming children in a way Google couldn't even dream of.
Aldarion
Egg Nazi
- 10,092
- 27,906
I appreciate someone bringing this up , it seems like this thread constantly suggests investing in the same companies that we bash in other threads for destroying Western Civilization.
Sanrith Descartes
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
- 45,824
- 126,503
It has always been discussed for all the years I have participated. Investors always have choices. I was anti-GOOG/FB for a long time. The amount of money I lost in opportunity costs finally outweighed my disgust.
Realistically 99% of the public companies are scumbags of the highest order. It really just is a matter of degrees. Eliminate banks, big oil, big pharma, big tech, everyone who sucks China's dick, and everyone who hires illegals or pushes jobs to H1 visa holders over citizens and who is really left to invest in?
- 1
For all the Zuck hate he was slower than most to engage in mass censorship. Google is far far worse. It is just harder to see on google since you don’t even know when your search is censored but when they pull down your pro J6 rant on Facebook I imagine they email you
- 1
- 1
- 1
Aldarion
Egg Nazi
- 10,092
- 27,906
So honest question here cause I don't understand how options work fully.
But isnt it possible to make money off these companies without putting money in their pockets, by shorting or puts? This isnt a criticism, its a question.
I will add that its not all or nothing; there are degrees of evil and hiring a few H1 visas or WTFever is just nowhere near the same level of evil as FB & Google.
Jysin
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 6,548
- 4,552
Buying straight up stock or options puts zero money in any company's pockets. (With the exception of the actual IPO)
If I am buying stock or an option, I am simply buying it from another shareholder like myself. Be it a retail trader, pro, hedge fund, etc. For every buyer is a seller.
Aldarion
Egg Nazi
- 10,092
- 27,906
Sure, I get that, I guess my question was poorly phrased.
When your investment actions contribute to the stock price rising, you are indirectly putting money in the company's pockets since their share prices rise too. When your investments contribute to the stock price falling, isnt that a preferable position in terms of not contributing to a company that a person considers evil?
granted that none of our small change investments actually make a noticable difference in the stock price, the question is about the principle.
When your investment actions contribute to the stock price rising, you are indirectly putting money in the company's pockets since their share prices rise too. When your investments contribute to the stock price falling, isnt that a preferable position in terms of not contributing to a company that a person considers evil?
granted that none of our small change investments actually make a noticable difference in the stock price, the question is about the principle.
Edaw
Parody
- 14,028
- 94,321
- 1
Jysin
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 6,548
- 4,552
We are flirting with a really precarious level of the SPY 390 here. I don't think the bulls would give this level up too easily. But if we do, I wouldn't be surprised to see some accellerated selling and opens the possibility of re-testing lows in the coming weeks.
That said, I have orders out here today. Again, this is a big level and bulls won't give up without a fight. Hopefully get an overshoot under the 390 and a reclaim for a bullish trigger for more buying to come in for a bounce.
That said, I have orders out here today. Again, this is a big level and bulls won't give up without a fight. Hopefully get an overshoot under the 390 and a reclaim for a bullish trigger for more buying to come in for a bounce.
- 1
Sanrith Descartes
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
- 45,824
- 126,503
Sanrith Descartes
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
- 45,824
- 126,503
Jysin
answered originally but I will add on some more detail. I think you are mixing up how things work with publicly traded companies and that is leading to your confusion. I will spend a few minutes trying to make it more clear.Shareholders own the company. Be it one share or 1 million shares. Yes ofttimes the company itself might own shares, quite often this tends to be a very small percentage of the total float (all shares outstanding). Most often, a high share price really helps the company when it wants to make an acquisition via shares as it makes their shares more valuable thus they need to give up less equity to purchase the other company.
The board of directors do not work for the company, they are selected by the owners (the major shareholders) to act as their agents (known and the principal and agent relationship) in watching the employees of the company to ensure the owners are getting maximum benefit from their stock ownership. It is this board who determines the compensation of the CEO (top employee). Depending on the company the board members may hold significant share positions or very few. In Twitter's case the board owns almost no shares except for Jack.
I explain the above to better explain the next part. As an investor, your buying or selling stock doesnt impact the company (in 99.9%) of situations. By you I mean us. When Elon Musk or Jim Cramer or Kathie announce stock moves they aren't impacting the company per se, but instead lots of other investors begin making moves to piggy back. Its this volume that moves prices as it tends to create an imbalance between buyers and sellers which can cause larger swings in price action (supply and demand). Nothing we as retailers do, Even Scrooge McDuck
Blazin
, can move a share price even a cent.Options: Options are nothing more than a contract to buy or sell a stock at an agreed upon price at an agreed upon date. You are correct that trading options doesn't initially involve taking actual ownership of the shares (for the most part). But its still putting you on the hook for the trade. Never ever make a trade for any single reason other than "I will make money on this trade". Imagine how shitty it would feel to trade an option on META or GOOGL and then find the trade goes the other way and you end up being assigned those shares. You would own something you despise and most likely at a financial loss as well.
Shorting: Shorting shares is selling shares you dont own but instead borrow. Again those of us on this board can have zero impact shorting a company. Shorting a company's stock not due to its financials but for emotional reasons is a good way to end up on the road to bankruptcy. We had a regular poster here who played the short game. He stopped posting here. Based on the trades he was making his losses playing short had to be exceedingly painful.
tldr: If you want to piss on a company, the market isnt the vehicle. Dont use their products/services, protest, piss on them via social media, use their competitors etc. At the end of the day, a company is just a financial instrument. The only people involved are employees, investors, vendors, supplies etc. I won't directly own cigarette companies because of my feelings about them. It is much more difficult with Beg Tech because of their size and inclusion in virtually every single index fund. You would have to avoid investing in big caps entirely.
- 5
- 1
Burns
Avatar of War Slayer
- 7,652
- 14,936
Yesterday, SPIR filed for a mixed shelf of up to $180 mil and an equity distribution agreement up to $85 mil. Doesn't that mean they are planning on diluting shares?
Sanrith Descartes
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
- 45,824
- 126,503
Sanrith Descartes
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
- 45,824
- 126,503
It means they are looking for the ability to do it in the future up to that amount. They have enough cash and credit line for about 18-24 months as the current burn rate. They acquired a small company in Canada last year (or early this year), so it could also be for an acquisition.
- 1
Jysin
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 6,548
- 4,552
That T chart is ugly. That yield is tempting, but my question would be... wtf is going on that it is bleeding so hard?
Technically speaking, your buy is at some support, but why is this so abysmally weak in the first place?
*edit* Quick browse shows T being the highest debt to market cap ratio by a big margin (more debt than their entire market cap, in fact!). What am I missing that you see? Are you not concerned with debts in a rising rate environment?
Debt & the Telecom Giants: Why Spreading the Risk May be Important in an Economic Decline
AT&T Inc. (NYSE:T), T-Mobile US (NASDAQ:TMUS), and Verizon (NYSE:VZ) are the three key telecom operators in the US. The stocks had lackluster performance, with TMUS delivering 6.8% in the last 12 months, T experiencing a deep drop of 38.4% and VZ losing some 23.3%. In this article we will...
Last edited:
Sanrith Descartes
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
- 45,824
- 126,503
I know this company pretty intimately. They dumped all told about $50d in debt with the dump of Time Warner. The c-suite management sucks. The chart also has to take into account the spin off of WBD. Its a cash cow. It make's money in spite of itself. The current 6.5% div yield is less than 40% of free cash flows so it is safe. They finally have made the decision to just be the biggest cell phone company in the US (again).That T chart is ugly. That yield is tempting, but my question would be... wtf is going on that it is bleeding so hard?
Technically speaking, your buy is at some support, but why is this so abysmally weak in the first place?
*edit* Quick browse shows T being the highest debt to market cap ratio by a big margin. What am I missing that you see? Are you not concerned with debts in a rising rate environment?
Debt & the Telecom Giants: Why Spreading the Risk May be Important in an Economic Decline
AT&T Inc. (NYSE:T), T-Mobile US (NASDAQ:TMUS), and Verizon (NYSE:VZ) are the three key telecom operators in the US. The stocks had lackluster performance, with TMUS delivering 6.8% in the last 12 months, T experiencing a deep drop of 38.4% and VZ losing some 23.3%. In this article we will...finance.yahoo.com
Its really just a sit and hedge play to balance out my portfolio. Im not calling a bottom, but its PE is 6 and it has immense market share. I dont see a lot of downside risk from here since cellphones are ingrained in the US now. I will absorb some dividends while the market and the economy continue to puke. From a weight perspective Im not really buying any more tech right now.
- 1
Gravel
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 40,856
- 136,576
It's actually easier if you explain how companies raise money for new "investment" (buildings, projects, etc). Doing things like a stock issue or bond issue are good ways of doing that, as opposed to finding a bank to loan you money.
Shareholders own the company. Be it one share or 1 million shares. Yes ofttimes the company itself might own shares, quite often this tends to be a very small percentage of the total float (all shares outstanding). Most often, a high share price really helps the company when it wants to make an acquisition via shares as it makes their shares more valuable thus they need to give up less equity to purchase the other company.
The board of directors do not work for the company, they are selected by the owners (the major shareholders) to act as their agents (known and the principal and agent relationship) in watching the employees of the company to ensure the owners are getting maximum benefit from their stock ownership. It is this board who determines the compensation of the CEO (top employee). Depending on the company the board members may hold significant share positions or very few. In Twitter's case the board owns almost no shares except for Jack.
I explain the above to better explain the next part. As an investor, your buying or selling stock doesnt impact the company (in 99.9%) of situations. By you I mean us. When Elon Musk or Jim Cramer or Kathie announce stock moves they aren't impacting the company per se, but instead lots of other investors begin making moves to piggy back. Its this volume that moves prices as it tends to create an imbalance between buyers and sellers which can cause larger swings in price action (supply and demand). Nothing we as retailers do, Even Scrooge McDuck
Options: Options are nothing more than a contract to buy or sell a stock at an agreed upon price at an agreed upon date. You are correct that trading options doesn't initially involve taking actual ownership of the shares (for the most part). But its still putting you on the hook for the trade. Never ever make a trade for any single reason other than "I will make money on this trade". Imagine how shitty it would feel to trade an option on META or GOOGL and then find the trade goes the other way and you end up being assigned those shares. You would own something you despise and most likely at a financial loss as well.
Shorting: Shorting shares is selling shares you dont own but instead borrow. Again those of us on this board can have zero impact shorting a company. Shorting a company's stock not due to its financials but for emotional reasons is a good way to end up on the road to bankruptcy. We had a regular poster here who played the short game. He stopped posting here. Based on the trades he was making his losses playing short had to be exceedingly painful.
tldr: If you want to piss on a company, the market isnt the vehicle. Dont use their products/services, protest, piss on them via social media, use their competitors etc. At the end of the day, a company is just a financial instrument. The only people involved are employees, investors, vendors, supplies etc. I won't directly own cigarette companies because of my feelings about them. It is much more difficult with Beg Tech because of their size and inclusion in virtually every single index fund. You would have to avoid investing in big caps entirely.
The company makes their money on the initial offering when they sell shares (ownership) in the company. Any further trading after that takes place are inconsequential; the company already financed themselves at the start.
Higher value of stock matters to the owners of the company, and in a subsequent offering of equity in the company means the company makes more money. But as has been said, daily trading doesn't actually do anything to/for the company.