Are Stock Markets biggest ponzis?

Quote from Angrycat:

Holy crap, are you ever bathed in ignorance.

I am not the one who never heard of Pets.com or Webvan... :)


If you know how to value a security

Who really knows that? I can get you the economic Nobel prize if you come up with a formula. The point is that companies without any earnings can go up 500% (see bubbles) and companies with decent background can go down. (See capital outflow or bearmarket)


IF the stock market were nothing but a Ponzi scheme, then NO wealth would have been created in the hundreds of years such markets

First we didn't say it is nothing but. Second, you still haven't made any good argument why a tech bubble stock was any different from a Ponzi coupon?


One of the hallmarks of an advanced economy and a wealthy people is a developed financial market.

Russia improved a lot between 1920-1980 without a stock market. So did China....

Go ahead and educate yourself on Pets.com.

P.S.: Since you seem to know so well, stock economy/history, could you tell us:

1. The % of stocks paying dividends in the last 30 years?

2. The % of stocks that went out on their high when the company got bought or finished its business?
 
stock markets are ponzi schemes...but the <b>biggest</b> of all is not the stock market but the <b>monetary system</b>.

think about it...

money is created out of thin air and the only way to operate the monetary system is by perpetually increasing the money supply to cover the deficit inherent to the fractional reserve policies.

in these circumstances, bankruptcy is inevitable, as well as inflation through currency devaluation.

like in any other ponzi scheme, when the bubble bursts, the top of the pyramid (the greatest fools) pay the bill. an analogy to the actual situation, would be the consumers and corporations that were increasing their debt levels in the latest years.
 
Quote from Angrycat:

IF the stock market were nothing but a Ponzi scheme, then NO wealth would have been created in the hundreds of years such markets
The whole article from 'Time magazine' is based on "unrealized gains".

Stock markets always displays "unrealized gains" which attracts new investors.


But the moment the investor tries to sell and realize the gain, demand disappears, and the asset crashes. Again, investors withdrawing early get better returns over that time period than those who waited until later.

So what does this mean?
 
Quote from Anaconda:

The business is a valid investment whether other buyers & sellers of that type of business exist or not.

The business is not a valid investment if customers change how much they are prepared to pay for its products and services, or employees change how much they will demand to work there, or the government changes how much it will tax it, or if it will even let it operate at all. Business and trade is just as vulnerable to shifting opinion, and relies just as much on other people's preferences as any stock price.

Your entire argument basically amounts to saying "stock prices depend on how people value the stock". Gee, thanks for that insight, Einstein.
 
Quote from Cutten:


Your entire argument basically amounts to saying "stock prices depend on how people value the stock". Gee, thanks for that insight, Einstein.

Obviously it is NOT this obvious, otherwise Angrycat wouldn't say such a things as valuating stocks by a formula and such. :)

By the way strangely, tulip prices are exactly the same, their value depends on what people think they worth. How strange!!! :eek:

..and although tulips are nice to look at, but their calorie value isn't much, in time of famine their prices tend to fail....

There is a very simple proof of the market working on the bigger fool principle:

Since most stocks don't pay dividends and they don't go out of their existence on their highs, you need to find a bigger fool who is willing to pay for it more than what you bought it for.

P.S.: I bought GOOG at $700, (Hey it was up 700%!!!) and all I got this nice T-shirt for it saying: If you don't know who the fool is in the market, then it is YOU!
 
Quote from Cutten:

The business is not a valid investment if customers change how much they are prepared to pay for its products and services, or employees change how much they will demand to work there, or the government changes how much it will tax it, or if it will even let it operate at all. Business and trade is just as vulnerable to shifting opinion, and relies just as much on other people's preferences as any stock price.

I did not mention customers, employees, taxes or regulations so maybe you need some basic reading comprehension. I am making a basic comparison, while keeping other factors constant, considering they affect all commerce.

I am talking about buyers & sellers of BUSINESSES. If you had the insight, you would realize that there is an established marketplace where businessmen buy & sell small private businesses.


Your entire argument basically amounts to saying "stock prices depend on how people value the stock". Gee, thanks for that insight, Einstein.

Apparently you need some basic logic as well. My argument is that public company stock nowdays is based on what the other guy is willing to buy it from you while the actual operations are irrelevant as you will never get cash from it like you do from a small business. When you invest in a small business, you expect to gain from cash flow generated by that business. When you invest in a public stock, you expect to gain by selling it higher to someone else, aka, new investors.
If you create amazing expectations and research reports of a small business, you won't profit from it. If you try to sell it to someone else for an inflated price while borderline lying about its operations, you will be sued for fraud.
If you do the same in the stock market, like what IB analysts, finance personalities & gurus do everyday, you can profit and never be at fault.
 
Quote from talknet:

Example-: "Ambani Brothers (Mukesh & Anil)" were collectively valued at $91 billion by Forbes some 4 months back. One of their companies "Reliance Power" received $200 Billion IPO subscription where the IPO was for $2 Billion only (not sure). Later on the stock market crashed, if not then investors (hedge funds & mutual funds) would have invested $200 billion in a "worthless company" which was original valued at $2 billion through the stock market . That is 100 times over-valued or unrealized gains.

Ambani's are the owner's of most over-valued, over-hyped, over-invested & basically worthless "Reliance Industries". No Company or Investment Firm in the world will ever pay the current market capitalization for acquisition of Reliance because the profits are not worth it. There is no future.

Basically there is "blind investments or unrealized gains" into Indian companies from local and international investors (hedge funds & mutual funds). There is no sales future.

That's the reason I always write "China & India will crash to rock bottom now.
Forgot to write-:

When China & India crash to rock bottom they will drag the whole world to "Depths of Hell"

Majority of $200 billion investors were from USA & Europe.
 
Quote from Angrycat:

Holy crap, are you ever bathed in ignorance. The public market does not operate on the bigger fool theory. It is a meeting place to increase liquidity and thereby make capital raising more efficient. If you know how to value a security (and I doubt many of you know how to perform a basic discounted cash flow analysis), then you will buy it because you think that is undervalued and you will sell it because you think it is at least fairly valued. The guy selling it to you or buying from you disagrees. It's debatable which of you is the fool and which of you is just not clairvoyant and is valuing from a set of different assumptions about the future.

Are you trying to make an arguement against the greater fool theory, while using said theory as an example in your arguement?
 
Quote from talknet:

Basically there is "blind investments or unrealized gains" into Indian companies from local and international investors (hedge funds & mutual funds). There is no sales future.

That's the reason I always write "China & India will crash to rock bottom now.
BREAKING NEWS-: Biggest Scam In Indian Corporate History

Chairman 'Raju' of 'Satyam Computers' 4th largest Indian software company and listed on NYSE, has resigned from the board. In his letter to the board, Raju admitted that the IT major's balance sheet has inflated cash and bank balance of $1.04 Billion.

Accrued interest of $78 million in books is non-existent. $256 million was arranged to Satyam, but was not reflected in the books."

Raju, unsuccessfully tried to sell two companies to Satyam last month in a final attempt to plug 50.4 billion rupees ($1.04 billion) of “fictitious assets” on the company’s balance sheet, Hyderabad-based Satyam said in a statement today. Profits from the main business have been inflated “over a period of last several years.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601080&sid=a37YOX1irBus&refer=asia
 
Back
Top