How and Why Athletes Go Broke (2009) • Hacker News Board

Re: How and Why Athletes Go Broke (2009)

#141

Post by vostok » Sat, Feb 10, 2018, 12:32 AM UTC

nikanj wrote: post #131

vostok wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never understood this perspective. If I buy something from Goldman then they think the price is too high and I think the price is too low. If I sell something to Goldman then they think the price is too low and I think it's too high. If they're not willing to bet against me then they'll say something like "sorry trader was off the desk". Or if they're just less willing to bet against me then they'll say "sorry m…

Except in this case it was Honest Goldman's Sound Financial Advice Inc advising you to buy, and Goldman's Shady Shell Fund Ltd selling. I don't think most clients of financial advisors check who's the counterparty in their trades. Legally, there's very little preventing your advisor from telling you to perform trades that make you poor and the advisor's buddies rich. A lot of the aftermath of the 2008 crisis boiled d…

I don't really see the issue unless there were incentives set up to encourage this and it wasn't properly disclosed.

Usually when you trade with a bank desk you know that they're betting against you because they're the ones on the other side. If they weren't doing that then you'd always have to wait for a customer to take the opposite bet, but the market might move by the time such a customer appears.

Generally you don't want people in Honest Goldman's Sound Financial Advice Inc to know what people in Goldman's Shady Shell Fund Ltd are doing and vice-versa.

Re: How and Why Athletes Go Broke (2009)

#142

Post by taheca » Sat, Feb 10, 2018, 12:34 AM UTC

airstrike wrote: post #104

specialist wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

re financial literacy Robert Kiyosaki and Sharon Lechter have been telling everyone who will listen since at least 1997. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Dad_Poor_Dad re critical thinking Years ago, one candidate for my state's Superintendent of Public Instruction aggressively opposed adding critical thinking and problem solving to the curriculum. It'd distract from all that useful standardized testing. She won. Se…

Rich Dad Poor Dad ain't exactly peer-reviewed research or even solid advice for that matter. It's a lousy self-help book at best.

Yeah.. Any critical thinker could see Robert trying to influence people. He actually is in favor of MLM systems in it, the minute I read that I was instantly suspicious of him... I later found out for good reason.

https://www.johntreed.com/blogs/john-t-reed-s-real-estate-in...

https://toughnickel.com/personal-finance/Robert-Kiyosaki-May...

Re: How and Why Athletes Go Broke (2009)

#143

Post by Spooky23 » Sat, Feb 10, 2018, 12:39 AM UTC

Kluny wrote: post #49

ggm wrote: post #13

In many situations, people who are identified as being at risk have somebody else placed in control of the finance, by court action. Brain injury patients for instance. Hmmm.. hang on.. whats the major risk factor in the football circuit again? Seriously: the recruitment of minors for major league with giant cash benefits should require them to sign a consent form for arms-length management of their capital for some…

Really, taking their adult autonomy away is the first step? How about education? This might be anecdotal, but I feel like we don't hear these athlete bankruptcy stories as often about hockey players. Why? Because they're all white, not black. Putting a kid through junior hockey is expensive and hockey players tend to come from privileged homes with much better financial education than young black football players. Th…

That’s a unique spin. It’s not about infantilizing. Hockey players also make a lot less, with fewer big payouts and thus fewer big flameouts.

Personally, I think the unions should help guide these guys. New money leading to bankruptcy is a universal story, not unique to any race.

Athletes are particularly vulnerable to scammers, as they spend a lot of time isolated by coaches with a small group of people. Self dealing trusted advisors and that isolation makes them vulnerable.

Re: How and Why Athletes Go Broke (2009)

#144

Post by ch4s3 » Sat, Feb 10, 2018, 12:42 AM UTC

specialist wrote: post #90

ch4s3 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ahh, I'm postulating a bit. >I'm no sure if that's all true of if it's anything more than correlation, but it makes some sense as a hypothesis. As I said, I could be wrong. But we know that other fields like management, fashion, music, etc are dominated by risk takers. It may not be true of sports or all sports, but you could imagine that a risk taking basketball player, football QB or running back, soccer forward, o…

Please stop explaining yourself. They're trolling you.

I don't really mind, and it was only one comment. I'm happy to explain myself when I can add clarity.

Re: How and Why Athletes Go Broke (2009)

#145

Post by dragonwriter » Sat, Feb 10, 2018, 12:45 AM UTC

nikanj wrote: post #131

vostok wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never understood this perspective. If I buy something from Goldman then they think the price is too high and I think the price is too low. If I sell something to Goldman then they think the price is too low and I think it's too high. If they're not willing to bet against me then they'll say something like "sorry trader was off the desk". Or if they're just less willing to bet against me then they'll say "sorry m…

Except in this case it was Honest Goldman's Sound Financial Advice Inc advising you to buy, and Goldman's Shady Shell Fund Ltd selling. I don't think most clients of financial advisors check who's the counterparty in their trades. Legally, there's very little preventing your advisor from telling you to perform trades that make you poor and the advisor's buddies rich. A lot of the aftermath of the 2008 crisis boiled d…

> Legally, there's very little preventing your advisor from telling you to perform trades that make you poor and the advisor's buddies rich.

Well, other than the new Fiduciary Rule, though the Trump Administration handling of the implementation of that rule seems to have everything up in the air, from the coverage I've seen.

Re: How and Why Athletes Go Broke (2009)

#146

Post by Spooky23 » Sat, Feb 10, 2018, 12:49 AM UTC

talmand wrote: post #109

potta_coffee wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just about every high school has a football team, equipment is often paid for via fundraisers/carwashes etc if it's not in the budget. Hockey is generally not a high school sport, young people have to pay to participate and do so completely on their own time outside of school.

So it's just as possible as football, but the locals decide to not offer hockey in the same way? What if predominately black high schools in large cities started demanding hockey teams?

The expenses are high and the exceptional players start very young.

Re: How and Why Athletes Go Broke (2009)

#147

Post by specialist » Sat, Feb 10, 2018, 12:53 AM UTC

taheca wrote: post #142

airstrike wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rich Dad Poor Dad ain't exactly peer-reviewed research or even solid advice for that matter. It's a lousy self-help book at best.

Yeah.. Any critical thinker could see Robert trying to influence people. He actually is in favor of MLM systems in it, the minute I read that I was instantly suspicious of him... I later found out for good reason. https://www.johntreed.com/blogs/john-t-reed-s-real-estate-in... https://toughnickel.com/personal-finance/Robert-Kiyosaki-May...

Good grief. Embarrassed thank you. I've added Kiyosaki to my twit filter.

Happily, I'm sure if I looked a little harder, I could find other, more reputable, people advocating financial literacy.

Re: How and Why Athletes Go Broke (2009)

#148

Post by fapi1974 » Sat, Feb 10, 2018, 12:57 AM UTC

Baeocystin wrote: post #140

pascalxus wrote: post #123

At the end of the day, it's the same reason most people go broke: they know nothing about money. Unfortunately, Money is the most important thing in the world because you can't get anything without it. And yet, it's not even a primary subject taught in k-12. Where are people supposed to go for a decent financial education? Instead k-12 teaches kids about useless butterflies and countless other things that are of less…

Do you have any book recommendations? I have some younger relatives graduating from college soon, and although they are bright, I worry about their financial sense. I talk to them regularly, but something more concrete would likely also help.

Rich Dad, Poor Dad is lifechanging for a lot of people. Note that it focuses on real estate, but the lessons are spot on.

Re: How and Why Athletes Go Broke (2009)

#149

Post by mobilefriendly » Sat, Feb 10, 2018, 1:03 AM UTC

ChuckMcM wrote: post #135

kpil wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you put that kind of money in a savings account, the bank will call you twice a day until they have made you move the money into something more profitable (for them.)

I would be surprised if the bank complained. They are only on the hook for $250K per the FDIC and could cover it with a low interest interbank loan from the FED. Since their mandatory reserve is only a fraction of the cash on deposit they will happily leverage it for greater returns paying you your paltry .7% while collecting much more than that.

This highlights the problem-- the most "conservative" approach, a savings account, is actually TERRIBLE financial advice. First the money won't keep pace with inflation and second a bank failure will wipe out the fortune. That happened to savers in 2008, most notably the failure of IndyMac.

Re: How and Why Athletes Go Broke (2009)

#150

Post by Spooky23 » Sat, Feb 10, 2018, 1:07 AM UTC

Brockenstein wrote: post #52

crankylinuxuser wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, what Cato says is very worrying (1). Primarily, they highlight court cases in which Social Security is pulled away from people, and reaffirmed by SCOTUS. This is the troubling quote: The Court’s decision was not surprising. In an earlier case, Helvering v. Davis (1937), the Court had ruled that Social Security was not a contributory insurance program, saying, “The proceeds of both the employee and empl…

>Then do the right thing and set Social Security as a guarantee at the same age for everyone. You have to take in consideration a few factors governing the original social security age limits. IE Life expectancy was significantly less. People live on average quite a bit longer now, addressing that reality isn't a bad idea. The other thing to consider is the money we're paying in now isn't being saved for our benefit…

Social Security is perfectly sustainable. The problem with is the demographic bump of the baby boom and use of it as a political football during the 60s and 70s when benefits were spun up, followed by the congress reducing funding by capping payments.