Bottom just fell out of Nikkei

Post by mey » Tue, Mar 15, 2011, 3:44 PM UTC

sunchild wrote: post #127

dasil003 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't those sunk costs though? Isn't the real question whether the market's information is overly optimistic or overly pessimistic? Given perfect information in the market wouldn't we expect it to be 50/50 based on true uncertainty about the future? These aren't rhetorical questions, this is just my line of thought based on my relative ignorance of investing.

People who need cash will sell at a depressed price. People who have cash will buy from them. The overall optimism for Japan's recovery is likely to be based on at least some hard facts: Japan is a leading national economy on the world stage, historically a huge producer/innovator, and proved after WWII that they can recover fast and big. Not a bad bet, barring another catastrophe such as earthquake further South, pa…

Post by sunchild » Tue, Mar 15, 2011, 4:27 PM UTC

mey wrote: post #131

sunchild wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who need cash will sell at a depressed price. People who have cash will buy from them. The overall optimism for Japan's recovery is likely to be based on at least some hard facts: Japan is a leading national economy on the world stage, historically a huge producer/innovator, and proved after WWII that they can recover fast and big. Not a bad bet, barring another catastrophe such as earthquake further South, pa…

Define fast and big. 7 years of foreign occupation occurred, with all the good and bad that comes with it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_Japan

Post by pero » Tue, Mar 15, 2011, 10:09 PM UTC

brown9-2 wrote: post #121

carsongross wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only an economist can consider a theory like that for more than a few seconds and not laugh hysterically. As Tom Woods has said, following this logic, the best thing we could do for our economy is build a huge armada of amazing battle ships, have Japan do likewise, then float them to the middle of the pacific and, after evacuating them (surely, the loss of human life is not a necessary component in this economic mode…

I actually believe this is a bit of an insult to economists. I don't believe most mainstream economists would consider anything involving loss of life on a large scale "a good thing", just those that dabble in economic theory.

Post by corin_ » Thu, Mar 17, 2011, 9:42 PM UTC

sireat wrote: post #125

corin_ wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Happens so, so often. A great example (very YC suited!) is Apple's stock prices in January. When Steve Jobs announced his medical leave just under two months ago, the Apple (AAPL) price opened the next day (Tuesday) down 5.44% on Friday's close price. The low point on Tuesday was 6.45% lower than Friday's close price. While the price did go back up a bit that same day (the Tuesday close was only 2.25% lower than Frid…

The thing is, what if Steve Jobs couldn't return to Apple at all? So market was pricing that possibility into the price of Apple stock. There is a legitimate concern, that without Jobs to supervise things, in a year or two, the "magic" of getting the right product out at Apple would be gone. Sure, Apple would still be making money, because Tim Cook is a great COO, but the "vision" would slowly fade. Think, Microsoft…

  in a year or two