Search results

Just wish there was a way to make sure they are held accountable, they probably pocketed millions by stealing from unsuspecting "newbies." I cannot understand how they still have a website! To be clear, as a trader I have come a long long way since this, but to find out it was just a straight...

yep, they're out there, but you need to watch like a hawk. I stayed on the sidelines. I still like MCOA based on the chart (to the extent charts hold value in the OTC markets).

Give me a break, we were all beginners at one time. This was a few years back, I had not even thought about it. But was going through emails and it jogged my memory because I want to make sure I take notes on all my trading now. Why does that upset you, I am being honest about what happened...

Now that I am getting back into trading I was going through some of my old account notes, etc and doing some reasearch. Wow, I wanted to let everyone know that I found out that a firm named G6 trading totally perpetrated a scam against me and who knows how many countless others. This happened...

Ah I assumed Ceteris paribus, but in your case it is not. Therefore, under your assumptions that would be correct. But CP, economically it would make sense to flow to the profitable biz and keep switching once profit become 0 (since no learning curve, etc.) Mathematically: X = -100,000 (sunk...

Ha, need to hope speculators jump on the same wrong side (and you don't), and there's a nice market shock! (i.e. short squeeze, news, etc.)

Haha well according to economic theory you would though right -the car factory and associated costs would be considered sunk. Therefore, if it was on a forward-looking basis more profitable to now create hair care products, you would. Remaining in the car business is the sunk cost fallacy.

Well your chances are much better with a .0001 stock than a lottery. Any uptick and 100% gain. Just need to do DD and figure out the right one that has some vol.

This is what I am saying. In a competitive market, firms reach equilibrium and therefore economic profit becomes 0. The only way to profit is during the imbalance which by definition will trend towards equilibrium at profit 0. That is not to say that the ACCOUNTING profit of such firms are...

Yeah, I should of pulled trigger, oh well. Would just be chasing at this point, don't you think?

DCAC today is an example of what I mean for anyone interested. Again, only good with throw away money.

The spreads on MCOA are pretty big, looks like MM manipulation, just need to let her run.

Hmm, well my understanding is monopolistic firms can price over their MC and therefore assure a profit. In contrast, in a competitive environment, firms will always be entering and exiting a given industry and drive profits down to zero. Hence over time, the aggregate firms will make zero...

MR=MC in a monopolistic environment I believe. In a competitive environment with multiple firms, the competition will drive economic profits down to zero over time.

Hi all, As stated in a previous thread, I am getting back into it after a few months to calm my mind from a trade blow up. Going to start small with a "fun" account and see what I can do. This is all my opinion and any trading decisions are yours alone. Feel free to comment etc. So last...

This is correct economically, assuming a competitive environment, profits will always equal 0 over time.

I say MJ 2.0 is upon us, some of marijuana stocks I track have been popping majorly (sadly I didn't pull the trigger). But here's a couple: CNBX and OWCP (as mentioned before). They may have run their course already, so not sure about chasing.

Right, but that's why it's a lotto play, with throw away money.

I wouldn't necessarily recommend it but for lottery plays its not bad i.e the trip zero. .0001 automatically doubles your money on any uptick (assuming volume). High leveraged lottery plays for sure, but if you have money laying around not a bad one. And if the company turns out to be a winner...

Actually this could be like TASR. Who cares about its effectiveness, departments will buy it. Regarding weed detection, the labs will consider a cut-off between someone being "stoned" and someone having traces in their system the same way a breathalizer says .08 vs .01.