It seems that a whole lot of folks have it in for the "shorts" people, and tghe more that I learn about them, the shorts people, the less sympathy I seem to have. Clearly when folks know that many are betting on a copany failing, that tends to push toward the failure. Sort of like vultures attacking the injured who might otherwise survive.
The good part is that so far at least, this "rebellion" has no blood-shead, other than bleeding profits away.
Once again I would remind those "shorters" that one should never gamble more than one can afford to lose. Thus no sympathy for those caught in the shorts squeeze.
Of course all of those buying the stocks and driving up the share prices need to understand that one does not get rich by the share price rising, one may get rich by selling that stock at the higher price. And in order to sell, one must have buyers at that higher price. That can be a problem after the top of the bubble has been reached.
So maybe there needs to be some added regulation of the whole share-shorting process.
That third paragraph of "How Short Selling works" is a bunch of "gobble" and an example of circular reasoning.
Short selling is a serious gamble, and gamblers should never bet more than they can afford to lose. Of course, once the wager is made there is a powerful motivation to tamper and make sure the shorted share price drops. Does that ever happen?? And does that ever happen?.Probably. So it seems that some sort or additional regulations are needed, since acting to cause a businesses value to drop may actually be a TORT.
Of course, I am in favor of adding regulations to a number of financial practices, including buying and selling "Futures."
Shorting has always seemed to be a serious and somewhat sadistic gamble, and so the smell of the present situation is mixed. The one thing that I see as totally missing is the answer as to who will be buying the shares that have become so very high priced? The profit from having those shares comes from the selling, at least unless they pay excellent dividends. And the fact is that when the rise slows or stops, suddenly those wanting to buy will be those wanting to watch. So while the rapid run-up of shares is really hard on the shorts group, it seems that when the momentum fades it will be an expensive education for those who expected to sell at the high prices.
It is usually quite difficult to sell "high" when nobody wants to buy at the high price.
This is interesting, especially in the light of what I had thought was an anti-nuclear power movement. So either the naysayers have changed their tune, or are being ignored.
Certainly there is a need for much more wisdom than we saw used for that Fukoshima power plant in Japan, whose grossly inadequate cooling arrangements lead to a disaster.
And given the limited number of players on the uranium supply side, certainly the ones doing well would be a good investment.
Interesting point of view, which I question a bit. IBM is not losing by any interpretation, instead the complaint is "lack of growth," which sounds to me like speculators screaming "More, More, More!"
Totally ignoring very respectable and consistent dividends and demanding increases in share price smells a lot like greed from where I stand. And constantly changing the direction is always a bit risky, since much of the future is not so very obvious to us.
Of course, it seems that those loud shareholders demanding growth, no matter what the risk, do have the ear of the board. But folks do need to keep in mind that with every gamble there is a risk of losing. As we are repeatedly reminded, "Past performance does not guarantee future performance."
Once again, my complaint about putting the good stuff in a fast flowing video instead of digestible text. Interesting and useful presentations have the best impact when applied in an absorbable manner instead of a fast moving monolog.
Latest Comments
Buy And HODL Forever, Legendary Short Seller Throws In The Towel
It seems that a whole lot of folks have it in for the "shorts" people, and tghe more that I learn about them, the shorts people, the less sympathy I seem to have. Clearly when folks know that many are betting on a copany failing, that tends to push toward the failure. Sort of like vultures attacking the injured who might otherwise survive.
The good part is that so far at least, this "rebellion" has no blood-shead, other than bleeding profits away.
Goldman Warns If The Short Squeeze Continues, The Entire Market Could Crash
Once again I would remind those "shorters" that one should never gamble more than one can afford to lose. Thus no sympathy for those caught in the shorts squeeze.
Of course all of those buying the stocks and driving up the share prices need to understand that one does not get rich by the share price rising, one may get rich by selling that stock at the higher price. And in order to sell, one must have buyers at that higher price. That can be a problem after the top of the bubble has been reached.
So maybe there needs to be some added regulation of the whole share-shorting process.
Private Equity Firm Silver Lake Cashes In AMC Shares For A $113 Million Gain
Interesting, even without much details or any conclusion or opinion.
My View On: Short Selling
That third paragraph of "How Short Selling works" is a bunch of "gobble" and an example of circular reasoning.
Short selling is a serious gamble, and gamblers should never bet more than they can afford to lose. Of course, once the wager is made there is a powerful motivation to tamper and make sure the shorted share price drops. Does that ever happen?? And does that ever happen?.Probably. So it seems that some sort or additional regulations are needed, since acting to cause a businesses value to drop may actually be a TORT.
Of course, I am in favor of adding regulations to a number of financial practices, including buying and selling "Futures."
Can The Silver Bugs Alter The Macro?
An interesting post indeed. The part that I really do not like at all is that G.T. may well be correct about inflation.
When Predator Becomes Prey
Shorting has always seemed to be a serious and somewhat sadistic gamble, and so the smell of the present situation is mixed. The one thing that I see as totally missing is the answer as to who will be buying the shares that have become so very high priced? The profit from having those shares comes from the selling, at least unless they pay excellent dividends. And the fact is that when the rise slows or stops, suddenly those wanting to buy will be those wanting to watch. So while the rapid run-up of shares is really hard on the shorts group, it seems that when the momentum fades it will be an expensive education for those who expected to sell at the high prices. It is usually quite difficult to sell "high" when nobody wants to buy at the high price.
Stock Snapback, What's In Play And What Earnings Are Next?
I do not like videos that would have been far more useful as text presentations.
4 Stocks To Play The Nuclear Energy Boom: Denison Mines, Ur-Energy, Cameco, And NexGen Energy
This is interesting, especially in the light of what I had thought was an anti-nuclear power movement. So either the naysayers have changed their tune, or are being ignored.
Certainly there is a need for much more wisdom than we saw used for that Fukoshima power plant in Japan, whose grossly inadequate cooling arrangements lead to a disaster.
And given the limited number of players on the uranium supply side, certainly the ones doing well would be a good investment.
Dividend Aristocrats: International Business Machines
Interesting point of view, which I question a bit. IBM is not losing by any interpretation, instead the complaint is "lack of growth," which sounds to me like speculators screaming "More, More, More!"
Totally ignoring very respectable and consistent dividends and demanding increases in share price smells a lot like greed from where I stand. And constantly changing the direction is always a bit risky, since much of the future is not so very obvious to us.
Of course, it seems that those loud shareholders demanding growth, no matter what the risk, do have the ear of the board. But folks do need to keep in mind that with every gamble there is a risk of losing. As we are repeatedly reminded, "Past performance does not guarantee future performance."
Dear Robinhood Bros: WallStreetBets And Gamestop Stock Takes Over
Once again, my complaint about putting the good stuff in a fast flowing video instead of digestible text. Interesting and useful presentations have the best impact when applied in an absorbable manner instead of a fast moving monolog.