Economy Stock Market chat. Discuss everything from Musk to iPhone

Status
Not open for further replies.
Are joking?
You're talking to someone who spends more time reading financial news than you spend hours at your job.
The trade negotiation fears caused a massive earnings calamity last quarter and the lack of solid deal, teased out over month, has caused incredible volatility where bits of news spoken by some of his staff, then refuted by other parts of his staff causing those spikes to erase.
From a stock market perspective this shit is terrible and causes pretty much every stock to become dangerous to trade, which scares away investment while also causing shitloads of stress to people brave enough to put their money in (myself included)

Interesting where do you get your news.
 
They don’t have to “fail” they just have to be overpriced.

As somebody said, the market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent. Tesla for example have absolutely killed shorts. They had to switch sides.



I agree that Tesla will be fine. I bought some on Friday.

 
Last edited:
Interesting where do you get your news.
I run bloomberg TV, CNBC on a monitor each, then I have online alerts setup for keywords and companies.
That said, it's basically impossible to outquick the instutional hedge funds when it comes to reacting to news coming across the wire.
 
I run bloomberg TV, CNBC on a monitor each, then I have online alerts setup for keywords and companies.
That said, it's basically impossible to outquick the instutional hedge funds when it comes to reacting to news coming across the wire.

Yes, do you feel like it helps you? Do you day trade?
 
Yes, do you feel like it helps you? Do you day trade?
Yes it "helps", but that's extremely debatable depending on the day and what the news being delivered is. Sometimes it's an obvious market mover and sometimes requires more reading of the tea leaves to then make a forwarding thinking move. I day trade and/or short term trade, included washes and position reversals on the same stock. I average about 30 trades a day (15 position opens and closes intraday).
 
I run bloomberg TV, CNBC on a monitor each, then I have online alerts setup for keywords and companies.
That said, it's basically impossible to outquick the instutional hedge funds when it comes to reacting to news coming across the wire.

They talk about absolutely nothing but I still watch. It's like arguing how many angels can fit on the head of a pin. Nobody knows. There is no knowledge actually being communicated. I spend hours a day reading. Watching these lectures now.

 
Like, I don't look at Tesla as a company but an idea. Just like Apple. Steve Jobs said he wanted to capture the hearts of people. That is what matters and that is what Musk has done. The abstract human element matters. Feelings matter. Even though people say they don't. As Jung said, reason alone will not suffice. It will not suffice in business either. The cult like following that Musk has I find irrational but yet it still exists.
 
Last edited:
I think Tesla stock will spike if they unveil the Y and a truck with decent price and specs. Trucks are a huge market, and the major car manufacturers are fortunate that it will be a while before Tesla produces one. Ford didnt announce an electric F150 because they wanted to. Their hand is forced.

Of course trucks will need huge battery packs, so ICE trucks will be safe until battery costs reduce significantly.
 
Musk & the iPhone are the two aspect of the economy one shouldn't bother discussing.;)
 
Oh yeah. I was way, way ahead of the curve on AMD. Called AMD's rise back in Feb-2017 with the launch of Ryzen and the rise of Crypto.

Of course, I also predicted a bump in their stock back in 2013 when they secured both major gaming console contracts, and produced the first high-performance APU.

Are you feeling yourself Mr. Madmick?..... Because I like it when you coat your cortex with such beauty.... Did you buy into more stocks. Think it could rise to 100 a share by the end of the year? I don't think they are competing for shareholder profits the way Nvidia is.
 
I think Tesla stock will spike if they unveil the Y and a truck with decent price and specs. Trucks are a huge market, and the major car manufacturers are fortunate that it will be a while before Tesla produces one. Ford didnt announce an electric F150 because they wanted to. Their hand is forced.

Of course trucks will need huge battery packs, so ICE trucks will be safe until battery costs reduce significantly.
I'm betting on them pushing this narrative, tricking some more eager investors, then I'm going to short it again knowing that hype won't last either once other manufacturers crush them.
You think a bunch of Ford and Chevy loyalists are gonna jump to a Tesla? Hellllllll no. They're already stupid for loving one company, and if they can get something electric from said brand, they definitely will. Plus truck owners aren't nearly as desperate to join the ranks of hypebeast luxury cars.
 
They talk about absolutely nothing but I still watch. It's like arguing how many angels can fit on the head of a pin. Nobody knows. There is no knowledge actually being communicated. I spend hours a day reading. Watching these lectures now.


I don't follow their advice, I just want to know what they're thinking. It's crucial in emotion-driven markets.
 
I don't follow their advice, I just want to know what they're thinking. It's crucial in emotion-driven markets.

Yes there is definitely causality between what these people say and stock prices. At least temporarily. When the people on Fast Money and Cramer pump a stock it goes up in the after hours at least for a little while. It is like a small bubble they create that soon pops. But lasts long enough to benefit them.
 
I'm betting on them pushing this narrative, tricking some more eager investors, then I'm going to short it again knowing that hype won't last either once other manufacturers crush them.
You think a bunch of Ford and Chevy loyalists are gonna jump to a Tesla? Hellllllll no. They're already stupid for loving one company, and if they can get something electric from said brand, they definitely will. Plus truck owners aren't nearly as desperate to join the ranks of hypebeast luxury cars.

Yeah with Tesla especially it seems like the public overracts to every bit of news, good or bad. It will be interesting to see what the demand is like when they have more competition.
 
As somebody said, the market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent. Tesla for example have absolutely killed shorts. They had to switch sides.



I agree that Tesla will be fine. I bought some on Friday.



Of course.
 
Don't short them dude. I've personally seen people lose fortunes shorting

And if you happen to short a company that is being backed by a couple of big boys you will get slaughtered

This post is aimed at @wlu.29

I don’t short, I buy puts.
 
Are you feeling yourself Mr. Madmick?..... Because I like it when you coat your cortex with such beauty.... Did you buy into more stocks. Think it could rise to 100 a share by the end of the year? I don't think they are competing for shareholder profits the way Nvidia is.
Oh, I'm coating my cortex, alright, LOL. I was on a mobile. I don't think I made it clear that the middle of 2013 was a bad time to buy. It didn't tank. It just didn't do anything for 5 years. On the other hand, Feb-2017 (right up to April 2018, IIRC) were fantastic times to buy AMD.

NVIDIA is still the leader in the AI/VR race, which isn't just about video games or sports entertainment, it's also the technology that powers self-driving cars, military technology, and all kinds of research, so I'm not sure what their continuing woes are about, because they are going to make a bundle of money. It's just a question of whether or not they're going to run into the same diminishing returns (i.e. deteriorating demand) in the gaming space that Apple has finally realized with the iPhone, and how that will offset their other profits. The game devs tell me ray-tracing and other more advanced graphical rendering techniques are the future, regardless of how trivial they seem now, because there just isn't any real juice left to squeeze out of an increase in polygon rendering, but I'm not convinced there's all that much juice to squeeze out of anything hardware-related, anymore, that is going to set a company apart by getting consumers so excited they shove their hands in their pockets, then pull them out to wave their money begging for it to be taken.

I'm not speculating more concretely than that. I'll leave the buys and sells to market players, but I figured some of you might make be able to digest a more abstract future, and apply it to your investment strategies. The rush to become the cloud-gaming Netflix is already on:
Microsoft CEO says Project xCloud is the ‘Netflix for games’

Which means that companies like this one are going to start getting bought for huge chunks of money like YouTube/Facebook/MySpace/Snapchat/Instagram were in the decade from 2004-2014. I'm sure their execs are building while they wait for one of the megasaurs to come in, sit them in a yacht, and shove them off into the sunset:
https://shadow.tech/usen

Netflix is already experimenting with a leap into interactive services with Bandersnatch. They have even said they don't see competitors like HBO as competitors. They see Fortnite as the real competition. Apple has admitted (while trying to not draw attention to it) that the iPhone is nearing the end of its tether for keeping the company at the top of the world, calling "Services" their own future, and there is no "service" more profitable than gaming (equals 3/4 of mobile OS revenues/profits). In fact, Netflix, their most profitable non-gaming app, just pulled up stakes (like many others) for iOS registration to avoid the "Apple tax" on the iOS market (~$286m a year, IIRC). Fortnite had already done the same despite that it must be available via the iTunes market for iPhone users to play it since side-loading entails illicit hacking on those phones.

Meanwhile, look at how much Google has invested in "Google News" to compete with Facebook. It's on the same market track as Apple as far as profits with games. Tencent, the owner of Fortnite, over in China is no different, except that it already is a "gaming" company (a highly diversified one). It's the Steam of China. Now it's trying to figure out how to drink Steam's milkshake outside China, but with an eye to mobile, because they realize the Steam of the world isn't going to be a PC service. It's going to be an Android service. That means ABC/Google is the competition. Android is irrefutably positioned to command the international market a few decades out.

Ad revenue from views coupled with information control from the news. Gambling psychology impulse buying revenue from freemium games.

I just tickles me how all of these companies are evolving towards the same rails from different trainyards.
 
Oh, I'm coating my cortex, alright, LOL. I was on a mobile. I don't think I made it clear that the middle of 2013 was a bad time to buy. It didn't tank. It just didn't do anything for 5 years. On the other hand, Feb-2017 (right up to April 2018, IIRC) were fantastic times to buy AMD.

NVIDIA is still the leader in the AI/VR race, which isn't just about video games or sports entertainment, it's also the technology that powers self-driving cars, military technology, and all kinds of research, so I'm not sure what their continuing woes are about, because they are going to make a bundle of money. It's just a question of whether or not they're going to run into the same diminishing returns (i.e. deteriorating demand) in the gaming space that Apple has finally realized with the iPhone, and how that will offset their other profits. The game devs tell me ray-tracing and other more advanced graphical rendering techniques are the future, regardless of how trivial they seem now, because there just isn't any real juice left to squeeze out of an increase in polygon rendering, but I'm not convinced there's all that much juice to squeeze out of anything hardware-related, anymore, that is going to set a company apart by getting consumers so excited they shove their hands in their pockets, then pull them out to wave their money begging for it to be taken.

I'm not speculating more concretely than that. I'll leave the buys and sells to market players, but I figured some of you might make be able to digest a more abstract future, and apply it to your investment strategies. The rush to become the cloud-gaming Netflix is already on:
Microsoft CEO says Project xCloud is the ‘Netflix for games’

Which means that companies like this one are going to start getting bought for huge chunks of money like YouTube/Facebook/MySpace/Snapchat/Instagram were in the decade from 2004-2014. I'm sure their execs are building while they wait for one of the megasaurs to come in, sit them in a yacht, and shove them off into the sunset:
https://shadow.tech/usen

Netflix is already experimenting with a leap into interactive services with Bandersnatch. They have even said they don't see competitors like HBO as competitors. They see Fortnite as the real competition. Apple has admitted (while trying to not draw attention to it) that the iPhone is nearing the end of its tether for keeping the company at the top of the world, calling "Services" their own future, and there is no "service" more profitable than gaming (equals 3/4 of mobile OS revenues/profits). In fact, Netflix, their most profitable non-gaming app, just pulled up stakes (like many others) for iOS registration to avoid the "Apple tax" on the iOS market (~$286m a year, IIRC). Fortnite had already done the same despite that it must be available via the iTunes market for iPhone users to play it since side-loading entails illicit hacking on those phones.

Meanwhile, look at how much Google has invested in "Google News" to compete with Facebook. It's on the same market track as Apple as far as profits with games. Tencent, the owner of Fortnite, over in China is no different, except that it already is a "gaming" company (a highly diversified one). It's the Steam of China. Now it's trying to figure out how to drink Steam's milkshake outside China, but with an eye to mobile, because they realize the Steam of the world isn't going to be a PC service. It's going to be an Android service. That means ABC/Google is the competition. Android is irrefutably positioned to command the international market a few decades out.

Ad revenue from views coupled with information control from the news. Gambling psychology impulse buying revenue from freemium games.

I just tickles me how all of these companies are evolving towards the same rails from different trainyards.

Gaming industry has so much money in comparison to other entertainment domains everyone is getting in on the scene now, which is why I am looking into technology like microprocessors and the like that makes it of interest to gamers for performance and aesthetics of future games.
 
Yeah with Tesla especially it seems like the public overracts to every bit of news, good or bad. It will be interesting to see what the demand is like when they have more competition.
They're going to get slaughtered longterm. Their entire operation relies on public faith in Elon Musk I think; seems extra retarded. They think they can do everything better and different, which is ultimate hubris in something as tangible as making cars for people.
 
China is a big market for gaming and producer obviously and their government is cracking down on it. They limit how much people can play and even banned new games for a while. Gaming is unproductive. I wouldn't be so big on video games.

You know who has a moat and a big winner this year in the market? WWE. Who is gonna take them on? McMahon is a psychopath who will do anything to destroy competition. I don't think I like the idea of him putting money into the XFL again though.

chart.ashx
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top