1. Standard memberwolfgang59
    howling mad
    In the den
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    45641
    07 Dec '18 04:06
    @averagejoe1 said
    Think of me cashing in when it roars back. I assume you think I have lost all my money.
    No. I think you lost 7% of your investment.
    Perhaps less now.
    What did you buy them at?
    Their 5-day high was 142 and low 124.
    That's volatile, partly due to Trump, it is not a good thing.
    Currently 128.

    You know Caterpillar started year at 157 and climbed to 170?
    And all the Trump supporters were saying "isnt that great!" MAGA! Trump is wonderful.

    Crashes to 124 .
    And all the Trump supporters were saying "isnt that great!" MAGA! Trump is wonderful.

    Totally brainwashed.
  2. Standard memberwolfgang59
    howling mad
    In the den
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    45641
    07 Dec '18 04:22
    @averagejoe1 said
    And nobody has got mine, as you suggest I lost 7%. No, I haven’t..... I haven’t sold anything at a loss.
    Question.

    You invest $1000 in Caterpillar.
    A week later that investment is worth $700.

    Are you worth more, less or the same as last week?
  3. Standard memberLundos
    Back to basics
    About
    Joined
    11 Dec '04
    Moves
    68737
    07 Dec '18 14:49
    @wolfgang59 said
    Question.

    You invest $1000 in Caterpillar.
    A week later that investment is worth $700.

    Are you worth more, less or the same as last week?
    It's worth less. However, there isn't a net loss until you actually sell them.

    AverageJoe (long run) invest for dividends (I assume in huge, 'safe' companies). Normally, you don't see a lot of investors of this kind. Mainly since expected dividends are already adjusted for in the stock value and the gain hereof are therefore marginal at best.

    Of course, if you the buy a stock that drops 7% within a week and you don't sell it, you haven't realised the loss yet per se, but you will have to keep that stock a longer period ceteris paribus. Therefore the opportunity cost will probably make that investment a net loss.
  4. Standard memberLundos
    Back to basics
    About
    Joined
    11 Dec '04
    Moves
    68737
    07 Dec '18 16:46
    @averagejoe1 said
    But this is a blip. Keep watching. The market cannot be timed. Invest for the long term. Trade is getting a lot of publicity. It was bad on Monday. But brokers LOVE big drops which present good buys. Again, you are investing in a company, you are not investing in a ‘market’. Snap up deals now, then Average your costs over a period of time. One day does not a market make ...[text shortened]... ing, I bought more, so my Average price was, say, $1375/share. Now, it is worth over $1600 I think.
    I guess 2018 is a "blip". But since brokers LOVE 'blips' I guess it's alright.

    https://seekingalpha.com/article/4223066-9-10-red-asset-markets-ytd-returns-signal-risk-repricing

    Then again maybe they really don't love it. Or don't understand the continued re-invest plan you suggested.
    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-26/purge-begins-deutsche-bank-fires-400-us-bankers

    https://seekingalpha.com/news/3401092-deutsche-bank-sacks-asset-management-head-billions-outflows

    Can’t google right now, got to go work, to make money, to give half to the govt: so the govt can give that money to people I don’t even know, for god-knows-what.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_good
  5. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52689
    07 Dec '18 17:221 edit
    In order to get brownie points for accomplishments, you have to HAVE accomplishments. Why don't you look at the national debt? When he took over it was 19 tril, now quickly approaching 22 trillion. You figure that is an accomplishment?
    His tax plan was not what it seemed, it did help out billionaires and companies but the whole reason was because they KNEW in advance reducing taxes that much would run up the national debt. It was deliberate they WANTED the ND to go up.
    The reason for that is they want to have ammunition to eviscerate social security and medicare.
    They will use the excuse that the national debt has gone up so much we have no choice but to cut social entitlements to the bone.

    This is not an accomplishment, it is more like treason, just like his buddies talking to the Russians in Trump tower, his own son lying to congress and now Mueller has figured it all out and will go after Trump sr.
    Trump Sr. deserves to be in prison, and the sooner the better.

    BTW, the stock market TOTAL value went down 4% in one week, not a great sign of accomplishment either. It might continue too.
  6. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52689
    07 Dec '18 18:36
    @wolfgang59 said
    Question.

    You invest $1000 in Caterpillar.
    A week later that investment is worth $700.

    Are you worth more, less or the same as last week?
    Actually 7% loss would make it worth 935 bucks not 700.
  7. Standard memberwolfgang59
    howling mad
    In the den
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    45641
    07 Dec '18 21:39
    @lundos said
    It's worth less. However, there isn't a net loss until you actually sell them.
    Mr A & Mr B both have $1,000

    Mr A buys $1,000 of Caterpillar shares.
    A week later Mr B buys the same amount of shares for $700.

    So
    Mr A has $700 of caterpillar shares.
    Mr B has $700 of caterpillar shares and $300 cash.

    Now if you are saying Mr A has not lost any money,
    then Mr B must have made $300.
    By just buying shares!!!
  8. Standard memberwolfgang59
    howling mad
    In the den
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    45641
    07 Dec '18 21:40
    @sonhouse said
    Actually 7% loss would make it worth 935 bucks not 700.
    You're an idiot sometimes Sonhouse.
  9. Standard memberLundos
    Back to basics
    About
    Joined
    11 Dec '04
    Moves
    68737
    09 Dec '18 14:08
    @wolfgang59 said
    Mr A & Mr B both have $1,000

    Mr A buys $1,000 of Caterpillar shares.
    A week later Mr B buys the same amount of shares for $700.

    So
    Mr A has $700 of caterpillar shares.
    Mr B has $700 of caterpillar shares and $300 cash.

    Now if you are saying Mr A has not lost any money,
    then Mr B must have made $300.
    By just buying shares!!!
    This and the other example aren't the same. I didn't say what you are saying I'm saying.

    The loss of $300 aren't a net loss until the stock are actually sold. That's the first example in a nutshell. In the second one the person B is buying at a better time and therefore doesn't have the potential loss. He still only have the $1000 he started with. Person A on the other hand faces a $300 potential loss when he sells his stock but until he sells it's still only a potential loss.
  10. Standard memberwolfgang59
    howling mad
    In the den
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    45641
    09 Dec '18 18:45
    @lundos said
    This and the other example aren't the same. I didn't say what you are saying I'm saying.

    The loss of $300 aren't a net loss until the stock are actually sold. That's the first example in a nutshell. In the second one the person B is buying at a better time and therefore doesn't have the potential loss. He still only have the $1000 he started with. Person A on the other han ...[text shortened]... 0 potential loss when he sells his stock but until he sells it's still only a potential loss.
    But in my example both men had $1,000 dollars last week.
    Now they both have the same number of shares but one of them has $300 as well.

    So either one has made $300 or one has lost $300.
    CLEARLY they cannot both be even over the week!
  11. Standard memberLundos
    Back to basics
    About
    Joined
    11 Dec '04
    Moves
    68737
    09 Dec '18 20:48
    @wolfgang59 said
    But in my example both men had $1,000 dollars last week.
    Now they both have the same number of shares but one of them has $300 as well.

    So either one has made $300 or one has lost $300.
    CLEARLY they cannot both be even over the week!
    I haven't said they are even. I haven't even implied it.

    Person A has a potential loss of $300. His total portfolio is worth less, yes, but you don't count investment loses until you sell/realize them. By then they are tax deductible and a lot of other mechanisms are at work.

    Person B invested at a better time and have no potential loss.

    I'm not saying person A is doing well or being smart - just that that in and of itself stock decreases aren't a net loss until you actually sell the decreased stock.
  12. Germany
    Joined
    27 Oct '08
    Moves
    3118
    09 Dec '18 22:39
    @lundos said
    I haven't said they are even. I haven't even implied it.

    Person A has a potential loss of $300. His total portfolio is worth less, yes, but you don't count investment loses until you sell/realize them. By then they are tax deductible and a lot of other mechanisms are at work.

    Person B invested at a better time and have no potential loss.

    I'm not saying person A is d ...[text shortened]... that in and of itself stock decreases aren't a net loss until you actually sell the decreased stock.
    Isn't the value of a stock just as imaginary as the value of currency? Why is a loss in the one immediate but a loss in the other conditional?
  13. Standard memberLundos
    Back to basics
    About
    Joined
    11 Dec '04
    Moves
    68737
    10 Dec '18 15:43
    @kazetnagorra said
    Isn't the value of a stock just as imaginary as the value of currency? Why is a loss in the one immediate but a loss in the other conditional?
    It's one way of putting it. FX trading is similar and then again not - mostly due to liquidity availability and leverage.

    With regards to this specific case a $300 loss in your own currency is felt instantly - you have $300 less to pay rent or buy groceries. A speculation loss in foreign currency is not until you use/sell that currency.
  14. Standard memberwolfgang59
    howling mad
    In the den
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    45641
    10 Dec '18 22:33
    @lundos said
    I haven't said they are even. I haven't even implied it.

    Person A has a potential loss of $300. His total portfolio is worth less, yes, but you don't count investment loses until you sell/realize them. By then they are tax deductible and a lot of other mechanisms are at work.

    Person B invested at a better time and have no potential loss.

    I'm not saying person A is d ...[text shortened]... that in and of itself stock decreases aren't a net loss until you actually sell the decreased stock.
    Let's bring in Mr C.

    Mr C buys $1,000 worth of shares same as Mr A.
    When they go down to $700 Mr C. sells.

    But then regretting his decision he buys them back.
    A and C now both have no cash and the same amount of shares.
    But apparently Mr C. has lost money and Mr. A has not!


    (For this hypothetical mind experiment lets assume no brokers' fees, no tax, no stamp duty.)
  15. Joined
    07 Feb '09
    Moves
    136221
    11 Dec '18 01:411 edit
    Meanwhile, the Trump show continues.

    Does anyone want a job in the White House ??
    Position that needs filling is White House Chief of Staff.

    Any takers ? Anyone ? Anyone ????
    Whodey ? Mott ?
    Maybe the janitor ?? 😛
Back to Top