Seeking Alpha

Business Economics Analyst

 
View as an RSS Feed
View Business Economics Analyst's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Is The U.S. Bankrupt? [View article]
    Actually, very few people in history have had more common sense than Keynes and krugman, and they are many times smarter and more accurate than you are or ever will be.
    Dec 30, 2013. 03:50 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Is The U.S. Bankrupt? [View article]
    The ability to print money means the us can't go bankrupt.
    Dec 30, 2013. 03:50 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Is The U.S. Bankrupt? [View article]
    Thank god they aren't doing what you want, that would be the path to ruin.
    Dec 30, 2013. 03:50 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Is The U.S. Bankrupt? [View article]
    How would you view your personal debt if you had the power to print money?
    Dec 30, 2013. 03:50 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Is The U.S. Bankrupt? [View article]
    The us is not bankrupt, and I never said the price of us hones never go down year over year.
    Dec 30, 2013. 03:50 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Losing My Religion: How I Unlearned Efficient Markets Folly [View article]
    1. what does it mean that "price reflects the available and known information"? I think that is a nonsensical statement. Even if it wasn't, what evidence do you have that price reflects the available and known information? I don't think you have any evidence of that or even what it means.
    2. What does that mean, "price changes reflect new information"? Again, that is is a nonsensical statement. Even if it wasn't, what evidence do you have that "price changes reflect new information? Again, I don't think you have any evidence to support that statement.

    First of all, many people trade stocks based on other things that information about the companies whose stock they are trading. There are high frequency traders trading on all kinds of algorithms independent of information about the companies, there are momentum traders, there are technical traders who trade based on charts, etc. So many price changes may have nothing to do with new information about the company. You see this almost daily with drastic changes in the price of a company with little or even no new news about the company.
    Even if everyone traded for different prices on new information, that doesn't tell you much as new information must be interpreted. Some people think the same information is good news for a company, and some people think it is bad news. A lot of new news is temporary and doesn't actually even change the long term prospects for the company. However, there may be quite some disagreements about that. There is no basis to say that all these views crystallize into the correct price for the stock.
    Dec 27, 2013. 08:19 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Losing My Religion: How I Unlearned Efficient Markets Folly [View article]
    Your inability to value invest correctly does not mean that value investing does not work. Although it is a small percentage of investors, many, many people, including myself, have successfully value invested for years, beating the market consistently and handily.
    Your logic is similar to someone saying that because they cannot beat par on a golf course, par cannot be beaten.
    Dec 27, 2013. 08:19 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Losing My Religion: How I Unlearned Efficient Markets Folly [View article]
    Taleb's Fooled by Randomness has some clever ideas and insights, but Taleb reveals that he does not understand how to pick stocks, or how to value companies and buy companies for less than they are worth. If he did, he would realize that Buffett, and the many other successful value investors, are not lucky, but have the right methodology as well as some skill.
    Dec 27, 2013. 07:16 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Losing My Religion: How I Unlearned Efficient Markets Folly [View article]
    It is very clear, and everyone it not doing it. Read Buffetts article, the Superinvestors of Graham and Doddsville. To beat the market, you need to understand and apply value investing, that is, learn how to value companies and purchase them at a substantial discount to what they are worth, and, of course, you have to have the ability, about a 130 iq is sufficient, and the interest.
    Dec 27, 2013. 07:16 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Losing My Religion: How I Unlearned Efficient Markets Folly [View article]
    the article is correct that the efficient market hypothesis is poppycock.
    That is not correct about Buffett, and there are many other value investors than Buffett who have beaten the indexes.
    The efficient market theory is one of the dumbest ideas ever invented by people who have absolutely no experience investing, and would never propose the theory if they did.
    I hope I don't hold in my head any ideas as dumb as the efficient market hypothesis.
    There is not a single shred of evidence anywhere that supports the efficient market hypothesis, it is complete nonsense.
    Dec 27, 2013. 07:16 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Losing My Religion: How I Unlearned Efficient Markets Folly [View article]
    If the efficient market hypothesis is correct, then its proponents should be able to look at "all" the information concerning a company and determine the market capitalization of the company, without looking at the actual market capitalization in advance, and should be able to quickly adjust the market capitalization throughout the day, shortly after it changes due to the stock market price changing.
    Otherwise, if there is no way to determine the value of the company by considering all the information known about it, and thereby coming up with the right price for the company that matches its actual market capitalization, then obviously the theory must be nonsense, which, of course, it is.
    If these believers in the efficient market hypothesis started actually valuing companies, and had the ability and skills to do so, they would begin to see clear disparities in the values of some companies and the market capitalization of those companies. The market get the price of some companies right, undervalues some companies, and overvalues other companies. Only someone not in the practice or game of valuing companies on a daily basis, and comparing those values to the market capitalizations, could ever possibly come to a belief in the efficient market hypothesis.
    Dec 27, 2013. 07:16 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • The AmTrust Controversy In A Nutshell [View article]
    I prefer the common.
    Dec 23, 2013. 11:58 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • AmTrust Financial Services: A House Of Cards? [View article]
    When you say that every stock selling for a p/e under 10 or 5 is selling for that price for a good reason, you sound like a devotee of the efficient market theory, which I completely disagree with.
    I believe some stocks are greately mispriced. I have looked at every U.S. stock trading for under a 10 p/e over the last 4.5 years and I keep an eye on them. AFSI is one of my favorites, my very favorite is JP Morgan since the London Whale incident. I think both stocks are selling at a heavy discount to what they are worth and I don't think there is any good reason for it at all.
    Dec 21, 2013. 10:55 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • AmTrust Financial Services: A House Of Cards? [View article]
    I prefer the common, I think it is just as safe, with better upside.
    Dec 21, 2013. 10:52 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • AmTrust Financial Services: A House Of Cards? [View article]
    I don't ever sell my stock based on someone else's opinion, I rely on my own due diligence and opinion.
    Dec 21, 2013. 10:52 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
2,565 Comments
1,693 Likes