ELON TUSK IS GOD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abrown83

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daly

I think it’s two different things

1. He’s clearly having “some issues” and needs help

2. He’s the CEO of a major company. He did this shit before when the stock was low, now again when it’s high (and defrauded people he sold shares to a few months back if he really thought it was too high). He should be in jail. He can’t do this in the middle of a trading day.

---

On number two, I actually believe he can. This isn't forward looking guidance. I had the same reaction and my father told me to STFU...(he worked under SEC regulations as well). He said use the inverse to test, "the stock should be higher." That gets said almost daily by CEOs on CNBC. Buttt dude is obviously on day two of a drug bender before his kid is born.

---

I don’t know what you’re going on about but you may have stumbled upon the fact that after all of Elon’s “episodes” the stock has run significantly higher.

Elon is not on the spectrum. He is aware of how he is perceived. I think he holds the public in low regard as well. He is crafty and vicious. The Tesla origin story informed us from go.

So yeah, I think he’s “acting” the fool. How he is cashing in we wil never really know. It doesn’t matter.

If “I” didn’t have my own spectrum of issues with TSLA I’d dabble in some long calls.

Edit:
I can be obtuse at times. Thus, yeah, I think he is manipulating his perception and stock.

This is akin to Druff sitting with an amber liquid at the table and acting drunk.

Wi-Fi 6E and unlicensed 6GHz spectrum

Yummy

My first purchase since this 'rona all started.

AW.UN A&W Revenue Royalty Income Fund.

$26.1242 (various prices) Canadian dollars.

I've pnwed this since in the low single digits.

Pay's 3% of the top line of REVENUES from that company's pool of fast food sales.

They announced sales down 42% (stock down about 33% from 39ish).

Used to yield 5%ish (100% payout ratio) when 39ish.

Currently would yield about 4%ish on their current sales (but actually yields ZERO as the suspended the payout). But they are "holding that 4% for us".

Eventually sales will go up if this thing rona maybe goes away and that purchase at $26 could yield 7-8% or so.

I was petrified with the market when the thing reached 16 and change and I just couldn't pull the trigger (trough for the whole market).



BTW, I expect it to go down now that I've purchased more. Reverse "pick" haunts me at first but then I just collect divies and forget about it mostly...

I am probably looking for income too early in my investing career, but I am interested and intrigued while reading about F.I.R.E. (Financial Independence, Retire Early) investing. I just don't wanna be a meth-head in the desert.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Forum Wars

My first purchase since this 'rona all started.

AW.UN A&W Revenue Royalty Income Fund.

$26.1242 (various prices) Canadian dollars.

I've pnwed this since in the low single digits.

Pay's 3% of the top line of REVENUES from that company's pool of fast food sales.

They announced sales down 42% (stock down about 33% from 39ish).

Used to yield 5%ish (100% payout ratio) when 39ish.

Currently would yield about 4%ish on their current sales (but actually yields ZERO as the suspended the payout). But they are "holding that 4% for us".

Eventually sales will go up if this thing rona maybe goes away and that purchase at $26 could yield 7-8% or so.

I was petrified with the market when the thing reached 16 and change and I just couldn't pull the trigger (trough for the whole market).



BTW, I expect it to go down now that I've purchased more. Reverse "pick" haunts me at first but then I just collect divies and forget about it mostly...

I am probably looking for income too early in my investing career, but I am interested and intrigued while reading about F.I.R.E. (Financial Independence, Retire Early) investing. I just don't wanna be a meth-head in the desert.

---

You should never put yourself down for dividend investing, it's proven in the broad market to outperform by 1% annually. That one percent is worth 6x your initial investment over 30 years, if you invest 10% of your initial investment per year.

So easy way to look at it is, if you have $50,000 and you invest $5000 a year into the account, for every 1% you outperform the market, you will get $300,000 additional ($50,000 x 6). So if you outperform by 2% you will have an additional $600,000 over 30 years.

Now that said, I still prefer Selling Puts against your holdings, because I think if done correctly you can generate a 1.5-2% return per month over the long run, but requires a lot more active management and needs a certain bank roll for it to make sense.

Correct me if I am wrong as I am still an investing noob. But the logic of selling puts of a stock you think is depressed and will go back up is if the put doesn't get ITM you just keep the money, but if it does then you just end up with the stock and sit on it until it goes back up?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abrown83

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Forum Wars

My first purchase since this 'rona all started.

AW.UN A&W Revenue Royalty Income Fund.

$26.1242 (various prices) Canadian dollars.

I've pnwed this since in the low single digits.

Pay's 3% of the top line of REVENUES from that company's pool of fast food sales.

They announced sales down 42% (stock down about 33% from 39ish).

Used to yield 5%ish (100% payout ratio) when 39ish.

Currently would yield about 4%ish on their current sales (but actually yields ZERO as the suspended the payout). But they are "holding that 4% for us".

Eventually sales will go up if this thing rona maybe goes away and that purchase at $26 could yield 7-8% or so.

I was petrified with the market when the thing reached 16 and change and I just couldn't pull the trigger (trough for the whole market).



BTW, I expect it to go down now that I've purchased more. Reverse "pick" haunts me at first but then I just collect divies and forget about it mostly...

I am probably looking for income too early in my investing career, but I am interested and intrigued while reading about F.I.R.E. (Financial Independence, Retire Early) investing. I just don't wanna be a meth-head in the desert.

---

You should never put yourself down for dividend investing, it's proven in the broad market to outperform by 1% annually. That one percent is worth 6x your initial investment over 30 years, if you invest 10% of your initial investment per year.

So easy way to look at it is, if you have $50,000 and you invest $5000 a year into the account, for every 1% you outperform the market, you will get $300,000 additional ($50,000 x 6). So if you outperform by 2% you will have an additional $600,000 over 30 years.

Now that said, I still prefer Selling Puts against your holdings, because I think if done correctly you can generate a 1.5-2% return per month over the long run, but requires a lot more active management and needs a certain bank roll for it to make sense.

---

funny way to spell "SPY PUTS NIGGA" but i aint mad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abrown83

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Forum Wars

My first purchase since this 'rona all started.

AW.UN A&W Revenue Royalty Income Fund.

$26.1242 (various prices) Canadian dollars.

I've pnwed this since in the low single digits.

Pay's 3% of the top line of REVENUES from that company's pool of fast food sales.

They announced sales down 42% (stock down about 33% from 39ish).

Used to yield 5%ish (100% payout ratio) when 39ish.

Currently would yield about 4%ish on their current sales (but actually yields ZERO as the suspended the payout). But they are "holding that 4% for us".

Eventually sales will go up if this thing rona maybe goes away and that purchase at $26 could yield 7-8% or so.

I was petrified with the market when the thing reached 16 and change and I just couldn't pull the trigger (trough for the whole market).



BTW, I expect it to go down now that I've purchased more. Reverse "pick" haunts me at first but then I just collect divies and forget about it mostly...

I am probably looking for income too early in my investing career, but I am interested and intrigued while reading about F.I.R.E. (Financial Independence, Retire Early) investing. I just don't wanna be a meth-head in the desert.

---

You should never put yourself down for dividend investing, it's proven in the broad market to outperform by 1% annually. That one percent is worth 6x your initial investment over 30 years, if you invest 10% of your initial investment per year.

So easy way to look at it is, if you have $50,000 and you invest $5000 a year into the account, for every 1% you outperform the market, you will get $300,000 additional ($50,000 x 6). So if you outperform by 2% you will have an additional $600,000 over 30 years.

Now that said, I still prefer Selling Puts against your holdings, because I think if done correctly you can generate a 1.5-2% return per month over the long run, but requires a lot more active management and needs a certain bank roll for it to make sense.

---

Thanks. I like the idea of selling puts (against what you already hold). I am now researching it...

Has anyone read this?


The Hour Between Dog and Wolf: How Risk Taking Transforms Us, Body and Mind


Seems interesting enough.


Following is a detailed review on Amazon:

Ian Mann
4.0 out of 5 stars
Reviewed in the United States on April 12, 2017
Verified Purchase

Dusk, in medieval times, was the hour between dog and wolf, a time when we could not easily distinguish one from the other. There was a pervasive fear that the dog you knew could become a wolf.
Author John Coates worked on Wall Street, in the 1990s, trading derivatives for Goldman Sachs, then Merrill Lynch, and finally running a desk for Deutsche Bank. During this time, the Nasdaq rose from 600 to a peak of just over 5,000! This spectacular rise was unsupported by any hard financial data. Translates into non-trading terms that means that the growth was based on a widely accepted delusion.
The economist, John Maynard Keynes, noted in the 1930s that markets could remain irrational longer than investors could remain solvent. In 2000, the Nasdaq collapsed dropping more than 3,000 points in about a year.
“While they last, (market) bubbles are fun,” notes Coates. During this period, he observed trader’s turn from dog to wolf. Investors egged on by traders were putting money into companies with inexplicable business models, in internet industries they did not understand. Coates noted at the time that it was almost impossible to engage in a reasoned discussion with either the owner or the investors.
According to folk wisdom, behind this type of mayhem lies overwhelming greed. It leaves no place for the sober thought that what cannot last, will not last.
Coates observed traders moving from assessing risk and making professional judgement accordingly, to believing that they knew what was going to happen. He observed “they even walk differently: more erect, more purposeful, their very bearing carrying a hint of danger: ‘Don’t mess with me,’ their bodies seem to say. ‘I can handle anything.’”
Their behaviour caught Coates’ during the dot.com era. It was undeniable that people were changing. Traders were slowly becoming euphoric and delusional. They were placing ever larger bets on ever worsening risk-reward trade-offs.
This type of behaviour has been identified in other areas, particularly politics. Lord David Owen, the former British Foreign Secretary, a neurologist by training, called the disorder, the Hubris Syndrome. It is characterised by “recklessness, an inattention to detail, overwhelming self-confidence, and contempt for others.”
What struck Coates at the time was the relative immunity of women to this frenzy.
Some had suggested that the mood was driven by the use of cocaine, but the extent of drug use was wildly exaggerated. Coates became convinced that we should be looking at traders’ biology. He hypothesised that the extreme overconfidence and risk-taking displayed during bubbles may be a chemically induced pathological behaviour. This could explain the difference between male and female responses.
Coates retired from Wall Street and returned to the University of Cambridge, where he had earned his Ph.D in economics, and spent the next four years retraining in neuroscience and endocrinology. He designed experiments to test the hypothesis that the “winner effect” exists in the financial markets. The “winner effect” has been identified in animals who have won fights, and now with even higher testosterone, go on to more risky fights. A similar phenomenon can be observed in sportsmen.
Through observation and experiments, Coates and others have been able to identify how our physiology actually determines, not simply affects, behaviour.
This is a powerful and counterintuitive insight. In the west, we have been raised on the notion that our brains control our bodies, but reliable science is fast showing the reality is just the opposite.
Kehaneman and Twersky studied the effects of behaviour on economics throughout the 20th century and won a Nobel Prize for their work. They showed, put simply, how economics is not a function of rational man making rational decisions, but rather that our minds affect our economic decisions in ways we are unaware. Coates highlights the step beyond this – our bodies actually control our thinking in ways we are unaware.
Consider a cricket fielder at silly mid-on, a position extremely close to the batsman. The ball leaving the bat can travel at speeds of up to 160 kilometres an hour. Crouched four metres from the batsman does not give the fielder enough time to register the trajectory of the ball consciously. His react to this lethal projectile occurs in 90 milliseconds. The body does the thinking before the mind knows.
The speed here is similar to the speed at which decisions have to be made in trading and investment. There is no time for a thorough analysis and research. Many well-known investors, including George Soros, admit being guided, in part, by physiological responses to positions. Soros reports that he used the onset of acute back pain as a signal that there was something wrong with his portfolio.
The notion of “gut feeling” implies that in even the most complex mental tasks, such as understanding the stock market, our bodies are giving guidance. Knowing when to take the guidance and when to ignore it is not a simple matter. It is here that knowledge and experience come into play.
Our bodies have evolved over centuries to respond to physical risks. Financial risk carries a similar threat, not of risk to life but certainly of risk to lifestyle and social status. Little wonder that the chemical or hormonal responses are similar.
Much has already been learned about dealing with stress situation from Sports Science. There is evidence that just as physical toughness can be developed to peak levels as seen in world class athletes, so too can mental toughness. This toughness would allow people in high stress, fast-paced business environments, to function more effectively.
That would be very useful.

Readability: Light ----+ Serious
Insights: High +---- Low
Practical: High ---+- Low

Remember folks the absolute best advice ever given by warren buffet was to buy when others are fearful and to sell when others are greedy.

It’s going to be interesting to see what the net reaction was to Berkshire today and how it impacts the open on Monday. There really can only be two ways to digest in my mind. Either the fellas are losing the edge and the really aren’t the smarter guys in the long term value space anymore having passed on companies when we were at the bottom -or- they still are and we are the fools for buying now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daly

It’s going to be interesting to see what the net reaction was to Berkshire today and how it impacts the open on Monday. There really can only be two ways to digest in my mind. Either the fellas are losing the edge and the really aren’t the smarter guys in the long term value space anymore having passed on companies when we were at the bottom -or- they still are and we are the fools for buying now.

---

We? whats with this “we”?

I’ve been going on about Charlie Munger for months. He had telegraphed his position well before the virus. This is not a shock. I characterized him as “cranky” in my posts.. He was not happy with what he saw. He was hardly part of the euphoria. Big on China though.

It’s a shame his CNBC mid day interviews aren’t avail. The formal sit downs are. He’s a civilized and formal chap in these settings. Not the real Charlie I know. I see he isn’t going to show at the next Berkshire dog and pony. Too bad.

Value?

I’m a little worried about your twitter habit now.

bro can we talk about the todge poker stock picks i went in on decn at like 21 it went to 45 im a fish and sold at 30 before it was suspended for 2 weeks and this cydy thing looks fire also

how did this website become profitable besides the good luck i put away calling u all faggots

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lol wow

bro can we talk about the todge poker stock picks i went in on decn at like 21 it went to 45 im a fish and sold at 30 before it was suspended for 2 weeks and this cydy thing looks fire also

how did this website become profitable besides the good luck i put away calling u all faggots

---

The CEO of the company sold most of us stock. Looking more and more like a pump and dump.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by verminaard

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lol wow

bro can we talk about the todge poker stock picks i went in on decn at like 21 it went to 45 im a fish and sold at 30 before it was suspended for 2 weeks and this cydy thing looks fire also

how did this website become profitable besides the good luck i put away calling u all faggots

---

The CEO of the company sold most of us stock. Looking more and more like a pump and dump.

---

I’ve read he sold half his stock. I’ve also read it’s bullshit and the transaction reported was him buying stock with warrants that he was owed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by verminaard

The CEO of the company sold most of us stock. Looking more and more like a pump and dump.

---

I’ve read he sold half his stock. I’ve also read it’s bullshit and the transaction reported was him buying stock with warrants that he was owed

---

Well, it was a $1 stock before Lemonlirab announcements, and although it has fallen off the highs, it is still over $3, so it appears there is still some optimism it is legit.

Time will tell.

if you see $1 stock go to $4 then hold fast at $3, its because a bunch of herbs bought it at $4 and dont want to leave a trade red.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by verminaard

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daly

I’ve read he sold half his stock. I’ve also read it’s bullshit and the transaction reported was him buying stock with warrants that he was owed

---

Well, it was a $1 stock before Lemonlirab announcements, and although it has fallen off the highs, it is still over $3, so it appears there is still some optimism it is legit.

Time will tell.

---

I have questions as well becuase if he did sell 4M shares it would be a red flag for sure. My understanding is he “sold” (executed) 4M Warrents back to the company. He owned the right to buy 4M shares at .35 a share and he executed that - that’s what the form 144 was all about. If he actually sells the shares now that we has possession of them it would go on a form 4. Most other executives file them all at once - he hasn’t done that “yet”.

I’d be surprised if he didn’t sell any. His 8m shares/warrents were Worth 2m 6 months ago. Today they are worth over 30M. He would be stupid not to sell 1M if not more. Half..... that would be a different story.

bro is this russia house laser disc owner talking shit about my stock acumen TO THE MOON ALICE

also i played little league with charlie mungers grandson does this make me a savant yes it probably does

kid sucked dick at the plate but was a good short stop like if you hit below 600 in little league get the fuck out of here