Stock Market Discussion

[Anonymous No.]

Other thread ruined by GLOBAL ECONOMY. I'll repost my last contribution:

>>1256510
I invest in everything that isn't oil and gas producers. I follow a set of rules, which I've learned from reading a book by Warren Buffett's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Buffett)) finance teacher (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Graham).).

1: I never invest in companies that lose money.

2: I look for shares traded at low multiples. I prefer companies with low debt levels which are traded below their net asset value. I also prefer stocks that aren't too pricey compared to their income.

3: I look for stocks that has gotten beaten down due to overreaction. Ciena (ticker code: CIEN) is down over 75% since august due to falling revenues and profit. Falling profits and revenues are never a positive thing, but mostly it's just temporary, and Ciena is still making huge profits compared to their market value. The company also has short term investments and cash worth 1.7 billion dollar - 54% more than their current market value.

To me, there's no reason why company that makes steady profits should be traded lower than the value of its cash and short term investments.

[Anonymous No.]

Reported

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256681
Why?

Seriously, why?

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256671

lrn2invest.

[Anonymous No.]

reported. Take this off topic shit elsewhere

you fags deserved that GLOBAL ECONOMY

[Anonymous No.]

I want to invest all my money in companies that produce visual novels and H-doujins; is there an investment firm that you suggest?

[Anonymous No.]

As I answered in that thread, such simplicity and logic are nice to see.
These rules are indeed what made Warren Buffett, along with good instincts, rich.

So, a what price did you start buying Ciena stocks, they seem to get beaten down pretty badly indeed.

Do you really think that, even though they're quite healthy, that telecom thing is going to keep going well ?

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256671
Reported out of principal. Even if you are thorough and clear on your points. Sorry, off-topic posts are fine once in a while but /jp/ is sucking lately. So if I report one of these I might as well report all of them.

[Anonymous No.]

>thread ruined by stock market discussion

fixed

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256714
Nikkei : - 2.75

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256671
your a fucking idiot if you think reading a fucking book is going to make you a stock market wiz. Theres a reason why people like Warren Buffet go to college for 5 years to learn about the stockmarket, don't waste your time reading Buffets book, its all buy undervalued shit and sell when they reach full value pretty much common sense, people have known about that before Warren Buffet.

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256709
No more off topic than ronery threads that everybody loves to BAWW about when deleted.

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256708
I'm not sure about the telecom industry. But the CEO said the company expected this to be a short, albeit a multi-quarter slowdown. I do trust him, as the main reason for the fall in profits was two major costumers delaying their orders and a the slowdown in the US economy.

The internet market is growing fast, and if the companies want to stay ahead in the rat race they'll have to keep investing in the telecom industry. I don't think CIEN is deserving of its current price, and I believe it'll be traded in the 20s within 12 months.

[Anonymous No.]

HERE COMES THE FAILDOZER BEEP BEEP

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256732
Duh, but still, it's not by buying overpriced debt ridden doomed sector crap that you're gonna make a buck.
I don't think op is aiming to become a millionnaire with his activities but he's probably not going to do anything stupid.
One does not have to come out of a 5 year finance major to invest.

[Anonymous No.]

HERE COMES THE FAILDOZER BEEP BEEP

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256742
You realise that betting that the US economy is going to go back up for a durable period anytime within 10years is quite risky ?

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256732
I study many of the same subjects as Buffet and finance majors has/had in university.

Stuff like Beta, Technical analysis and risk/return won't get you anywhere according to Buffet and other successful investors like Peter Lynch. These guys look at companies trades at prices lower than their intrinsic value.

My goal is to be able to spot those companies, and make a decent return on my investments. Enough to have a decent life. I'm not a stock market jock looking for the next Microsoft, unlike those guys that study the stock market 5 years in college.

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256743
yeah you pretty much do, when you play the stockmarket your pretty much going up against EVERY FUCKING BANK IN THE FUCKING WORLD, they have tons of financial majors keeping watch over potential stocks and tons of computers crunching numbers. Entering the stockmarket game after reading a Warren Buffet book ain't going to help you...

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256749
I'm not betting on the economy. The internet is the fastest growing market. Most telecom companies HAVE TO invest more in order to keep up with the ever increasing telecom demand.

Even if my assumptions fail, it still won't change the fact taht CIEN is traded way below its real value.

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256765
You overestimate banks very much, they are often fucking stupid.
I should know, I worked in a small investment one.
You'd have lots of fun seeing what banks do.
And it's not because you're investing on the same market as a bank who can dish a billion that you can't make a profit, stocks trade the same price for you and banks.

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256765
It's not necessarily a zero-sum game. That said, he's probably going to lose his shirt.

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

whats with all the butthurt on /jp/? Wahh mods banned me for submitting false reports so I'm going to spam shitty pics, seriously get a life.

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256795
I can see someone is angry because his investments in farm equipment didn't turn very well.

[Anonymous No.]

/jp/ - Tractors/Stock investing

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

I cannot help but wonder why one would have so many pictures of tractors...

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256783
Yes but what you have to understand is that the stockmarket is not a giant fucking money tree the odds of gaining money in the stockmarket is less than 50% , If you look at the investment records of banks all of them are pretty much gaining money, most of the losses actually comes from independents.

TL:DR
The losses have to come from somewhere, and banks take up most of the wins.

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

Is this the same guy with all the shit pictures? That spams every thread that hurts his feelings with "This thread is shit"?

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

fundamentals take too damn long to decide on an investment vector, just use charts you pile of shit

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256828
How do you know these independents follow the same set of rules as I (I'm the OP)? 85% of all day traders lose money. But how many long term investors putting their money in stocks priced at near book value levels lose?

[ZUN !barYV1VtIA No.]

Thread has no place in /jp/.

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256850
>>85% of all day traders lose money

sauce or bullshit

[Anonymous No.]

I know that GLOBAL ECONOMY is related to everything, but it'd be nice, >>1256671, if you at least pretended that this had anything to do with Japan.

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256852

Thread has no place anywhere on 4chan. There's no /ec/onomy or something

Maybe it could be on /b/, but then it would be saged by unknown reasons

/jp/ is picked up for being one of the last sane threads (LOL /v//a/grants)

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256828
How strange to put investing as a matter of probability when it is really one of information.
Banks lose as much as the next, and they do so with their clients' money anyway.
Funds don't usually disclose where their losses and gains come from, you can't know if banks are investing in anything different from you.
For example, I'm currently looking at a bank fund's results and I don't see much gains (Exane).
Sure, they employ lots of people and have much to invest, increasing their chances of hitting the right thing, but that doesn't stop you in any way from investing in the right thing.

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256866
First source I could find:
The numbers are by this point well known, but they're no less staggering for all that. Most estimates suggest that 80 to 90 percent of all day traders lose money.

http://www.slate.com/id/1003329/

I also got a book on investing that says 85% of all day traders in america lose, 10% break even and the remaining 5 make money.

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256866
I believe he is talking about those casual day traders, not funds.
Seeing what kind of stupid shit people do on day, I wouldn't be surprised.

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

I am shorting the fuck out of eurusd

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256889
>>1256879
>>1256881

gb2 /k/. This is worse than the discussion of Clannad 18 and Nagisa über alles back in February's /a/

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256850
The problem is that you do not know what stocks are worth "book value", If you look at the % of gain to loss from long term investing The losses are still greater. I remember seeing it from the government report which im too lazy to look over to find actual numbers. You don't know what companies are worth book value, The only trick to winning the stockmarket like everything else is to do your homework, research everything about that company, the problem is that the banks and major firms are able to access things that normal investors are not privy to, they send inspectors to inspect the companies, they have computer programs constantly calculating numbers, they are able to meet with top executives to find out what is in the company's future. If you are serious about the stockmarket go to college and study it don't go wasting your life savings over a fucking book.

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256912
Who said I'm betting against the banks? There are probably no stocks on NYSE or Nasdaq that aren't owned by institutional investors.

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256886
slate is not a reliable source.

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256912
Not the op, but of course one does not go around investing while simply looking at a first page in bloomberg, at least not if he wants to make a living out of it, and it is true that while working in a bank, you can pretty much call the direction of whichever company you want and get the info you want, but still, investing, NOT trading, is a thing that an individual can do intelligently and be able to make a profit in a few years.
I'm not talking about these people who think they're the hottest trader since Kerviel ( Who did make a billion [spoiler ] before everything was lost because of his bank[/spoiler]), I'm talking about placing your money in a sane way in a company which you believe has the stuff to become a better one than it is today.

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256912
Not the op, but of course one does not go around investing while simply looking at a first page in bloomberg, at least not if he wants to make a living out of it, and it is true that while working in a bank, you can pretty much call the direction of whichever company you want and get the info you want, but still, investing, NOT trading, is a thing that an individual can do intelligently and be able to make a profit in a few years.
I'm not talking about these people who think they're the hottest trader since Kerviel ( Who did make a billion before everything was lost because of his bank), I'm talking about placing your money in a sane way in a company which you believe has the stuff to become a better one than it is today.

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256923
You are not betting against banks, It is just simple probability, Say you are flipping a coin the odds of a win is 50/50, however the bank has flipped the coin 50 times and won 50 times, therefore 50 people must lose in the long run. The more the banks win the lower your probability of winning for the odds to even out.

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256951
...I think you are confusing cause and effect there.

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256942
How are you supposed to know if a company has the right stuff or not without looking at their statistics, visiting their facilities and speaking with their executives? You don't! Your advice is pretty much the exactly like the advice "Buy low and sell high", it is not helpful at all, considering the fact that any with a iq over 50 has already figured it out.

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256951
But, the point is, it's not a coin toss.
Finance is not random.
And most people have no way to know if a bank invests in something anyway, you could be investing in the same thing as a bank.
Plus, when you invest in something that a bank hasn't invested on (which is quite unlikely unless it's a small company, because there are thousands of investment funds each with it's "own" policy) you're not always betting against the bank, institutions don't have the same considerations as private investors.
For each opinion, there is an opposing one, and more often than not, the consensus is wrong, I don't think most banks are making a profit nowadays.

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256951
You're wrong on so many levels. Private investors don't make up a fraction of the stock market. Practically everything is owned by professional, hedge funds and banks. In order for your your theory to add up, equally many banks have to lose as those who win.

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256962
How is this cause and effect? This is science that has been proven already.

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256984 don't make up a fraction of
That's impossible; you can't get an irrational number from a ratio of two finite numbers.

[Anonymous No.]

>>1256973
Statistics surely do amount to something, but a good manager, a sector with growth possibilities and resources are enough to be confident in a company's possibilities.
Plus, there aren't so many numbers to know, you can get most of them from the company results and from general information.
No need to be head of analysis at merryl lynch to see that a sector isn't going to be going good for a while or that materials are rising without the company being able to raise prices.

[Anonymous No.]

Addendum: Finite INTEGERS.