Jysin
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 6,792
- 4,911
Investing General Discussion
- Thread starter Furious
- Start date
Blazin
Creative Title
- 7,405
- 37,289
Being a friday and "invasion" over the weekend seems like fear will have the upper hand, but I certainly wouldn't take the short because a monday open 100 pts higher is not out of the cards if the saber rattling proves false
- 1
Blazin
Creative Title
- 7,405
- 37,289
Also geopolitics don't make the market drop that much historically, and this is a war we aren't even a part of unless we idiotically decide to step into it for no benefit. The Stock market only dropped 10% after pearl harbor of all things.
- 1
Jysin
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 6,792
- 4,911
I find that fascinating. But also, with algo and trading on smart phones for the average joe blow... I feel the same events would play out completely differently in today's environment.
Sanrith Descartes
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
- 46,738
- 131,321
When I look at my PYPL i take solace in the fact that at least it isn't RIVN. Its close mind you, but at least RIVN is still shittier than PYPL for now.
- 1
Sanrith Descartes
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
- 46,738
- 131,321
Blazin
Creative Title
- 7,405
- 37,289
I don't buy that at all other than on very short time frames. ALgos have zero effect on anything other than the short term. They play a role in execution without a doubt they do not change fundamental investor fear and greed driven behavior. Don't really need to "think" this as we already have decades of data with algos and decades without to show things have not changed in fundamental behaviors. So I'll agree yes the day of an event starting, the velocity of moves now would likely exceed then, but it works both ways a sudden dearth of liquidity would have been more common prior to machines . Price discovery is now more efficient and world wide this allows adjustments to to price to occur quickly but it does not fundamentally change the extent of that change.
- 2
Blazin
Creative Title
- 7,405
- 37,289
Only has about $55/share more to go before it would just be "grossly overvalued"
- 1
- 1
Borzak
Silver Baron of the Realm
- 26,572
- 35,356
In 1941 how many average citizens were invested in the stock market and able to buy/sell stocks at a moments notice. I know my family didn't even have phones yet. Compare that to how many were heavily invested in the stock market in companies that were already gearing up for lend/lease and they knew increased production was coming.
Sanrith Descartes
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
- 46,738
- 131,321
Sanrith Descartes
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
- 46,738
- 131,321
GOOGL closing above my buy at $2704 will be considered a moral victory in my book.
- 1
Blazin
Creative Title
- 7,405
- 37,289
Makes no difference. Not trying to be dismissive but look at this way. 100% of the stock market was owned by humans in 1941 and enough of them for their behavior to be statistically relevant to humans as a whole. Today 100% of the stock market is owned by humans. Yes more of them as a %, but as we add or take humans away they don't somehow become more or less human.
The "this time is different" thinking is always driven by the belief that external factors are the largest movers of price instead of human sentiment. The externalities are always changing, our lizard brain that controls base emotions like fear are for more immutable.
- 1
Sanrith Descartes
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
- 46,738
- 131,321
Sanrith Descartes
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
- 46,738
- 131,321
- 11,622
- 63,767
Borzak
Silver Baron of the Realm
- 26,572
- 35,356
Hmmm. Medical treatment might kind of skyrocket the inflation then. Just guessing lol. Solid plan I guess, we don't need better economic policy just need fewer people. Good thing that's just Joe Blow off the street making those comments.
Flobee
Vyemm Raider
- 2,785
- 3,251
Borzak
Silver Baron of the Realm
- 26,572
- 35,356