241–250 of 430 posts
I have made all that back and more by instead going long things that are cheap + growing.
Being a bear pays off 1% of the time, and the act of trying to time it actually changes the window so just be an optimist and get rich.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lawyers have to paid now till then. Companies settle much faster typically to reduce some of this costs, it ends up being cheaper. Also many of these will be resolved through their arbitration clauses that would be present in the contracts. Arbitration is much faster and usually appeal proof
Delta sued for what, $500M? These would have to be some expensive lawyers, even for lawyers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lawyers have to paid now till then. Companies settle much faster typically to reduce some of this costs, it ends up being cheaper. Also many of these will be resolved through their arbitration clauses that would be present in the contracts. Arbitration is much faster and usually appeal proof
Delta sued for what, $500M? These would have to be some expensive lawyers, even for lawyers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Delta sued for what, $500M? These would have to be some expensive lawyers, even for lawyers.
That is just one customer, and also it is not just lawyers, Contingent liabilities(potential amount for settlement) when it escalates from possible to probable, in GAAP that means it changes from mere footnote to a line item in P&L which needs to be financed and managed and affecting their margins well before the actual settlement is decided.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rebalancing is just selling the high performers and buying the low performers. In his example, you'd keep your "safe asset" allocation at say 15% - if your other stocks did well one year, you'd sell some and buy more "safe assets" so they again constitute 15% of your total value. If stocks tanked, you'd instead sell some "safe assets" and buy more stocks, again until your "safe assets" are back at 15% of total value.
> Rebalancing is just selling the high performers and buying the low performers. Guaranteeing mediocre performance. Not my cup a tea.
What you describe sounds like a kind of momentum/market cap investing, which is favourable in the short term, but suffers a lot when things go bad.
(This is assuming one cannot predict future returns better than the rest of the market. If you do that all the better!)
Seems like there's a lot of confusion on this. I'll see if I can get a fuller article up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I've ironically lost more money the more closely I've paid attention to my investments Money Magazine a few years ago compared various investment strategies in stocks. The #2 best performing one was investing in the S&P 500. The #1 best performing strategy was the "dead man strategy". The dead man strategy comes into play when the investor dies, and his estate gets frozen until it winds its way through the courts.…
Doing nothing saves trading costs which are a major drag. The standard advice for equities investors (at least in the UK) has been to invest in tracker funds for a very long time. it is possible to beat the market. Many years ago I double my money in approx an year - but I invested heavily in I had been covering as a analyst (one of my previous careers) until immediately before. I am more cautious now.
Getting out while they are ahead is a smart move, especially considering multiple governments have started to take a closer look at their shorting tactics.
Can someone give me the context please? I’ve never heard of this organisation before. What do they do and what are they known for?
[0] https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2024-07-02/people... [1] https://telegra.ph/Hindenburg-01-16
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A few years ago cost structures for managing one's investment portfolios were also significantly higher than today! There's an even better alternative for someone willing to put in the leg work: (1) Figure out your investment horizon. For many people, this is way shorter than suggested by generic advice, which makes some diversification beyond "stonks go up" meaningful. (2) Figure out what costs you'll incur by rebal…
Agree with you 100%, I did the same simulations and found the same result. I would suggest a step beyond though, because rebalancing your portfolio is fun year 1-5, but not so fun year 5-20: have a look at e.g. Vanguard retirement target funds. Essentially, it's an ETF with a rebalancing rule included for a specific target date. For instance if you buy the target 2050 (your hypothetical retirement age), the ETF rebal…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It can put you at unlimited risk even if you are absolutely right. The risk is in borrowing, not short selling. How many momo jockies out there think about the "unlimited risk" from buying Tesla on margin? In that case, you're shorting USD, but no one talks about that because it always will be fashionable to short USD. Just like it always will be fashionable to short JPY, for carry and more. Until it's not.
You can short USD by buying Bitcoin or a similar non-correlated asset but how could buying a usd correlated asset (TSLA) be shorting?