|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
BS.Dos.
Joined: 29 Mar 2007
|
 Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 9:48 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Thunndarr wrote: |
| BS.Dos. wrote: |
Stop thinking binary. Happiness, for some of us at least, isn't quantified so irreducibly. |
Ah, but it is for us. Gotcha! You are one sharp cookie.
Let me play. You have feelings of inadequacy regarding your financial status, |
Not sure what you mean by 'feelings' Sheman, but you're right; I'm not what you'd consider 'flush'.
| Quote: |
| [...] but rather than being mature and dealing with those issues within yourself, you'd rather lash out with sophomoric psychological analyses of people you've never met. |
Read what was posted. Analytical speculation of what may or may not be going on inside my head only reinforces the fact that you really are residing in some kind of castle Greyskull hell.
Having said that, I'm liking how in this sentence you're 'lashing-out'.
| Quote: |
| You would like to think that while others may have more money than you, you (and prseumably other short-term planners like yourself) lead a spiritually richer life. |
Spiritually richer? Your words, not mine. Phillip Morris is my spiritual guru.
| Quote: |
| Clearly then, you are the one who is thinking binarily, since you've equated not only the possession of money, but financial planning, with spiritual emptiness. Congratulations on contradicting yourself. |
You're making your own connections with that one. I like that you're reading between the lines, but you lose me when you equate what I didn't think with what I never wrote.
| Quote: |
| I predict this attitude of yours will abruptly change when you either A) turn 30 |
Even though you're off on the age, I'm liking how you're able to make predictions about the future. Please let me know what colour pants I'll be wearing next Tuesday.
| Quote: |
and realize you don't have a dime to your name or B) get married and realize that living the life of an ascetic won't put a roof over your family's head. |
So, the only way to provide for your family is through stock market speculation? I think we both know that's not true.
| Quote: |
| (It is possible this attitude of yours will never change. That's ok, I'm sure that your attitude of smug condescension will comfort you in your penniless future much more than a nice place to live and financial freedom ever would.) |
Nice sentiment, but why you think a life without stock investments will result in me being penniless is about as valid as your parochial perspective.
I don't really care what you choose to do with your money. Just do so responsibly and without throwing it blindly at some unscrupulous intermediary whose sole motivation is to maximise both his and your pathetic bottom-end irrespective of the wider consequences. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bobbyhanlon
Joined: 09 Nov 2003
Location: 서울
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jati wrote: |
| bobbyhanlon wrote: |
| crazy_arcade wrote: |
| Personally, I don't invest in anything that I can't buy a decent amount of shares in. I like have 1000 shares...but any number from 500 and up will suffice. I have an American friend who buys into big big companies (like Microsoft and stuff) and I seriously can't see the sense in owning one share of a company. |
man, percentage-wise it makes no difference. besides one share of microsoft is only $19. actually microsoft looks a pretty good bet in my opinion, if you look at its valuation. |
Not sure what you mean by percentage-wise, but it does make a difference if you pay a fixed broker fee for purchases. For example, if you use Charles Schwab online to buy Microsoft at $19.
One share = $19
Broker fee = $12.95
Broker fee = 40% of the total paid for 1 share ($31.95 = 1x12.95 + 1x19)
One hundred shares = $1,900
Broker fee = $12.95
Broker fee = 0.7% of the total paid for 100 shares ($1,912.95 = 1x12.95 + 100x19)
I think that that was what crazy_arcade was referring to, maybe not.
I like to buy enough shares so that the broker's fee is under 1%. |
i wasn't suggesting anyone buy one share of microsoft. that would be crazy. imagine a company whose shares trade for $1, and another, whose shares trade for $10,000. lets say you have $10,000 to invest. would you rather have 10,000 shares of the first one, or one share of the second one? too many people think the first option is better, but in fact it makes no fundamental difference. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thunndarr
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 3:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BS.Dos. wrote: |
| Thunndarr wrote: |
| BS.Dos. wrote: |
Stop thinking binary. Happiness, for some of us at least, isn't quantified so irreducibly. |
Ah, but it is for us. Gotcha! You are one sharp cookie.
Let me play. You have feelings of inadequacy regarding your financial status, |
Not sure what you mean by 'feelings' Sheman, but you're right; I'm not what you'd consider 'flush'.
Well, alright, BSDouche, I'll play along once again. (And my name has nothing at all to do with He-man, but nice try.)
| Quote: |
| [...] but rather than being mature and dealing with those issues within yourself, you'd rather lash out with sophomoric psychological analyses of people you've never met. |
Read what was posted. Analytical speculation of what may or may not be going on inside my head only reinforces the fact that you really are residing in some kind of castle Greyskull hell.
Moron. You completely missed the point that my completely uninformed sophomoric analyses of you was completely in response to your completely uninformed analyses of the rest of us on this thread. (Which should go to show you that your original remarks were baseless. Apparently you didn't catch that.)
Having said that, I'm liking how in this sentence you're 'lashing-out'.
| Quote: |
| You would like to think that while others may have more money than you, you (and prseumably other short-term planners like yourself) lead a spiritually richer life. |
Spiritually richer? Your words, not mine. Phillip Morris is my spiritual guru.
Those words were a nice encapsulation of the sentiments you've expressed. But feel free to back off of those remarks.
| Quote: |
| Clearly then, you are the one who is thinking binarily, since you've equated not only the possession of money, but financial planning, with spiritual emptiness. Congratulations on contradicting yourself. |
You're making your own connections with that one. I like that you're reading between the lines, but you lose me when you equate what I didn't think with what I never wrote.
Ok, let's write this down even more simply. You wrote the following:
| Quote: |
| "Think about something other than making money you shallow cunts." |
Binary thinking. Maybe you just aren't able to understand what you wrote, but you clearly equate thinking about money with being shallow. That is binary. You later say:
| Quote: |
| Stop thinking binary. Happiness, for some of us at least, isn't quantified so irreducibly. |
That is a contradictory. Jesus you are fucking stupid.
| Quote: |
| I predict this attitude of yours will abruptly change when you either A) turn 30 |
Even though you're off on the age, I'm liking how you're able to make predictions about the future. Please let me know what colour pants I'll be wearing next Tuesday.
Once again, the fact that I could be completely off base in my judgment of you means that you are just as off base in your judgment of the rest of us in this thread. See how that works? Thanks for playing, btw.
| Quote: |
and realize you don't have a dime to your name or B) get married and realize that living the life of an ascetic won't put a roof over your family's head. |
So, the only way to provide for your family is through stock market speculation? I think we both know that's not true.
I don't think I ever claimed that. Care to show me where I did? I believe I did mention, however, financial planning. But again, according to you, people who think about money are "shallow cunts."
| Quote: |
| (It is possible this attitude of yours will never change. That's ok, I'm sure that your attitude of smug condescension will comfort you in your penniless future much more than a nice place to live and financial freedom ever would.) |
Nice sentiment, but why you think a life without stock investments will result in me being penniless is about as valid as your parochial perspective.
Again, the strawman. I specifically said "financial planning." To repeat, once again, you stated earlier that you didn't think about money (unless, of course, you care to group yourself with the rest of us shallow cunts.)
I don't really care what you choose to do with your money. Just do so responsibly and without throwing it blindly at some unscrupulous intermediary whose sole motivation is to maximise both his and your pathetic bottom-end irrespective of the wider consequences. |
So, let's sum up.
You offer up an unsubstantiated opinion on those of us concerned with financial planning. Apparently you think that's ok.
I, upon reading that, think, what a fucking moron! He doesn't know the first thing about anyone on this thread. A ha! I know what I'll do. I'll do the same thing right back at him. Sure, it's an incredibly elementary ploy, but the guy hasn't given me any reason to think he'll see through it. I only hope he'll take offense to it, thereby proving my point.
And, thank you very much, you obliged. Case closed, you are an idiot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jati
Joined: 13 Dec 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 9:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
BS.Dos., again, I am hoping that your time with the meds and the therapist begin to produce results soon.
Why not start your own thread? You know, something like: "I don't have money to invest, so I will ridicule anyone who does."
Really.
Start the thread and then we'll see who is really interested in your sarcastic comments.
Where is a MODERATOR when we need one? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jati
Joined: 13 Dec 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 10:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bobbyhanlon wrote: |
| i wasn't suggesting anyone buy one share of microsoft. that would be crazy. imagine a company whose shares trade for $1, and another, whose shares trade for $10,000. lets say you have $10,000 to invest. would you rather have 10,000 shares of the first one, or one share of the second one? too many people think the first option is better, but in fact it makes no fundamental difference. |
Okay, I understand your point now. I agree. It shouldn't matter if you own $10k in one share of a stock valued at $10k per share, or one thousand shares of a stock valued at $1 per share. A 1% rise in each case leads to a 1% rise in value. The price per share shouldn't matter, but that doesn't mean it doesn't matter to some people. We have been conditioned always to consider that a lower price is better.
Some investors can get their heads around buying shares of a company for $1 each, but find it harder to accept paying $10,000 for a share of another company. I have a colleague who is like that. He'll look at a $50 stock with a 5% dividend yield and think that it is not as good as a $10 stock with a 2.5% yield. The yield means nothing to him, only the price.
A few companies have allowed their share prices to appreciate to high levels, e.g., Berkshire-Hathaway and Google. I suppose this makes it look very valuable, when in fact it simply reduces the liquidity of the company shares. Most companies will split their shares in order to lower the price. This allows more retail investors to participate in the buying/selling and makes the shares more liquid.
Often-times a company's shares will enjoy a 'bump' in price after a split although there is no technical reason for the bump. It is partly psychology, and partly the result of liquidity.
So yeah, it shouldn't make a difference, but psychologically, it does matter to some investors. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crazy_arcade
Joined: 05 Nov 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 10:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You have to remember something important. At sometime you're going to want to sell your stock. Not only is there the brokerage fee thing that another poster mention, but there's the problem of trying to sell and odd/strange number of stocks. Got 1000 shares of something, you're much more likely to get your asking price than if you have 1 share.
Here's some reading on the topic:
http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/143.asp
Remember that stock that I mentioned earlier?
Teck Cominco B on the TSX
Well, you should take a look at the price when I recommended it and it's price now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bobbyhanlon
Joined: 09 Nov 2003
Location: 서울
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2009 12:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
again, i would never suggest buying just one share- i was taking an extreme example. although you could make an exception for berkshire hathaway of course. what i am trying to say is the perceived 'better value' of low-priced stocks is an illusion.
and also if you have 100 shares of a low-volume stock, you're more likely to get a better price than if you have 1000 shares of it.
anyway congrats on teck cominco.. if this rally continues that kind of stock will probably bounce much higher, too.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ntchimy
Joined: 06 Nov 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry for a little off-topic.
Did anyone have experience in trading stocks here in Korea?
Which agent is considered cheap and foreigner friendly for trading stocks in Korea?
I have an account at Tongyang Securities Inc. but I have to do more research to start. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crazy_arcade
Joined: 05 Nov 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2009 3:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Just wanted to say thanks because I learned a few things from this thread.
Also wondering about peoples' opinions about a few things.
There's been a recent upswing in stockmarkets and it seems that a lot of people are getting into shorting stocks or day trading. Seems that a lot of people are thinking that this is just a short bubble right now and that prices will go back down again. I don't know about this...but I'm just trying to buy invest in companies that I think have value to them and hold on to them for the longer term. I'm also trying to diversify my portfolio a bit and, if prices to go back down, I'll probably just buy more. I'm not a doomsday sayer and don't believe a lot of this crap people reactionaries are spouting these days (it's the end of the world! OMG!)
I do have to say that it is tempting at the moment to turn some stocks but I'm trying to stick it out. Think this upswing is just for the short-term or are we going to continue to see a nice rebound in through 2009? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mole
Joined: 06 Feb 2003
Location: Act III
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2009 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crazy_arcade wrote: |
Just wanted to say thanks because I learned a few things from this thread. ...
Think this upswing is just for the short-term or are we going to continue to see a nice rebound in through 2009? |
When the market cheerleaders on MSNBC, CNBC, Bloomberg can't even fake a positive face while reporting RALLIES, there might be a problem.
From the responses in the thread I have to wonder,
do you folks not have access to financial news under your rocks? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jati
Joined: 13 Dec 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2009 8:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mole wrote: |
| crazy_arcade wrote: |
Just wanted to say thanks because I learned a few things from this thread. ...
Think this upswing is just for the short-term or are we going to continue to see a nice rebound in through 2009? |
When the market cheerleaders on MSNBC, CNBC, Bloomberg can't even fake a positive face while reporting RALLIES, there might be a problem.
From the responses in the thread I have to wonder,
do you folks not have access to financial news under your rocks? |
Yes, I have a satellite dish on top of my rock. Works except for when some pigeon flies over and .... well, you get the picture. ' '
I read a lot. Watch the talking heads on the telly, and then decide for myself. If the world is coming to an end then I doubt that a bar of gold will do me any better than a sack of rice. At least you can barter with rice.
In a recession -which is where we are right now- companies that make things that people NEED -food, soap, cigarettes, beer- will continue to sell product. Also, drug companies always do well too; guess it stems from people wanting to continue taking their meds (BS.Dos. perhaps?).
I don't expect the markets to rally much at all this year, maybe 5-10%. So, a 3% rally on Friday, 2 January, means to me that it will go down again this year, and then up again, and then maybe down again, and then perhaps up again, and then .... well, you get the picture (again).
Meanwhile -back at the ranch, errr, rock- my dividend-paying companies will continue to pay out their dividends and I will continue to reinvest those dividends. Lower stock prices means higher share reinvestment; higher stock prices means lower share reinvestment. It is called compound interest, and it works. (Urban legend has Einstein calling compound interest mankind's greatest invention.) So, in a good way, the lower prices benefits me, a dividend re-investor.
Back to my rock.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mole
Joined: 06 Feb 2003
Location: Act III
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 1:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jati wrote: |
[
Meanwhile -back at the ranch, errr, rock- my dividend-paying companies will continue to pay out their dividends and I will continue to reinvest those dividends. Lower stock prices means higher share reinvestment; higher stock prices means lower share reinvestment. It is called compound interest, and it works. (Urban legend has Einstein calling compound interest mankind's greatest invention.) So, in a good way, the lower prices benefits me, a dividend re-investor.
Back to my rock.... |
Very good explanation of conventional wisdom. I'd always wondered.
I bought in, realized I'm not a gambler (too stressful,) and bailed.
I just don't believe the equities markets will recover. Or even exist much longer.
I feel the sheeple awakening to the fact that the whole system is Madoffed.
Get some beans, too. You might get bored of rice sometimes.
And some silver with your gold. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
itaewonguy
Joined: 25 Mar 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 1:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| crazy_arcade wrote: |
Remember that stock that I mentioned earlier?
Teck Cominco B on the TSX
Well, you should take a look at the price when I recommended it and it's price now. |
I surely remember that stock.. because soon as your mentioned it
I bought myself 200 shares of it..
thanks a lot for that tip.. this stock is very nice.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bobbyhanlon
Joined: 09 Nov 2003
Location: 서울
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 5:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mole wrote: |
| crazy_arcade wrote: |
Just wanted to say thanks because I learned a few things from this thread. ...
Think this upswing is just for the short-term or are we going to continue to see a nice rebound in through 2009? |
When the market cheerleaders on MSNBC, CNBC, Bloomberg can't even fake a positive face while reporting RALLIES, there might be a problem.
|
i'd say thats probably the time to buy. since when did anyone make any money following investment advice on tv? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jati
Joined: 13 Dec 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mole wrote: |
Very good explanation of conventional wisdom. I'd always wondered. I bought in, realized I'm not a gambler (too stressful,) and bailed. I just don't believe the equities markets will recover. Or even exist much longer. I feel the sheeple awakening to the fact that the whole system is Madoffed.
Get some beans, too. You might get bored of rice sometimes.
And some silver with your gold. |
Basically, we are each describing our own level of risk aversion. No one knows whether stock prices will be higher next year at this time, or lower, or even if the market exists. In Finance 101 they teach this concept of risk aversion, and also the idea of risk-reward.
The NYSE fell around 34% last year. This drove many investors out of stocks, the ones that have a high aversion to risk. If you think that the market will go up over the next few years, you invest now. There is a risk that the market will not go higher, but if it does, then the reward will be greater to those taking that risk because they have a low aversion to risk.
After the market goes back up, those with a high aversion to risk will jump back in -at the wrong time!- because then the potential for reward will be lower than it was when the market was lower. Does this make sense?
I like the idea that buying part ownership of a company is a good investment, but that there are good times to buy and bad times to buy. The good time to buy is when there is a greater upside potential relative to downside risk. The bad time to buy is when there is little upside potential relative to downside risk. Guess what? The mass public usually buys at the wrong time. In investing, it doesn't benefit to run with the crowd unless you were one of the first ones into that investment.
Some people look at the stock markets like a gambling casino. I don't. The richest people that I know own companies. Since I don't own my own company, I have decided to be a part-owner of a bunch of companies. These companies reward me by paying out some of the profits as dividends, usually four times a year. By reinvesting the dividends, I am getting a compounding four times a year. It really works; you just have to be in long enough to start seeing the benefit.
I don't know, Mole, if you have any skin in this game, but I do. And it works. Really. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
