Uggghhh...I don't know what to do. I'm gonna need to take the money in my non-retirement account out for a new roof in a few months. I was up 11% after I started investing it in July 2013, now I'm up 3.5%...can't decide if I should just bail out now or leave it until April.
Stock-Age: Stocks, Options and Dividends oh my!
- Thread starter koam
- Start date
My first reason is simple; to invest I need funds, I owned almost 10 companies, so the little money I could put in once in a while would not grow them enough and would be costly in fees. It's basically diminished returns at this point, I can't add an equal sum to all my investments at once, so it would take months to increase all my investments once.
Second, to me there are enough factors to make the chances of an upward trend less likely. I prefer to have cash to invest on opportunities, when stocks I like dip below what I consider fair value, as I have done with the companies I sold today. My buy signal is just Exponential Moving Average set to 100 days, and then analysis.
And Canada is likely to crash soonI'll be moving cash to USD.
You'll be moving to USD now? While the CAD is already a crapshoot?
Also wow what a bad day... Again.
ibitegirls
Member
Bailing during market downtime is not a good idea. Once some good news comes out, the market will make up the lost gains and you may regret it, just my two cents..
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Yes, because I think it will fall lower when the real estate bubble pops.
RumblingRosco
Member
-
Yeah, I think I'm gonna hold strong. At least I'm still in the green.
Oh I know, but the outlook was so positive last year that I couldn't resist. And it paid off...until 2014 hit.
I'm still above what I put in, just going through that sucky feeling of "I knew I should have sold a few weeks ago".
I can't stand having that cash just sit in my account earning 0.07%!
I traded 10k CAD on January 13... Up 1.7% alone only since then lol.
You're talking about Canada right?
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
BTW I didn't sell anything that was in my 401k (RRSP), I never touch that because I'm very long term on it, I don't want to mess with that, from 2007 to now my worst performance was 1% in 2008. I'm just invested in three funds there (50% US, 35% developed world-wide excluding US, 15% small caps Canadian). My non-401k portfolio was much riskier, with 3D printing, solar, Tesla, etc. I also sold my emerging market investments last Friday, but not the Japan one even though it's doing even worst. I'm willing to sit on it but not for a long time. I didn't touch my US and Israel ETF investments either and am not planning to.
This is one of those lines that sound good but really, when is down down? You could have said the same at the beginning of the downturn in 2008. What is down today might pale in comparison to how low we go a week or a month from now. I've gone through downtimes before, but had no way to make judgement on market valuation. Right now I see a lot of reasons that tell me to keep my money out, probably not for very long, but enough to seize opportunities eventually. One thing is for sure, I'm not going to just sit on it, but for the next few days I'm in figuring-things-out mode. Too many things have happened quickly, so I need some points of reference (things have been clearer: fed tapering is hurting emerging markets, emerging markets took socially unsustainable actions to grow over the past decade and it seems to be reckoning time at least in "democracies", Canada is probably on the verge of a big downfall, and US is seen again as a safe(r) haven). There is no foreseeable scenario where I would not put most of my money in the US so worst comes to worst it almost all goes in the S&P, just not while things haven't stabilized.
Yes. The only good news is supposedly a big surplus, but that's thanks to cutting a lot of stuff we need as a society, so long-term effects will be felt eventually. I expect F to use the IMF's statement that Canada doesn't need to keep its budget balanced in the face of a downturn as a reason to push it away and take some tax-cutting actions, and hope to ride that till the election and then win a majority on a "you need us to keep the economy afloat or else it will get worst!" line.
Plugging GreaterFool again:
TD is the same bank that recently adjusted its small print: if you have a variable-rate mortgage and the house falls to 80% of its value, the bank asks you to send them a check to pay for the difference, or else prove them it hasn't fallen that low. That's right, if the market tanks they want you to pay for their loss. It used to have to fall below 75%. They are gearing up for a downfall and so have a lot of companies who have been firing people left and right.
Love this part:
This is one of those lines that sound good but really, when is down down? You could have said the same at the beginning of the downturn in 2008. What is down today might pale in comparison to how low we go a week or a month from now. I've gone through downtimes before, but had no way to make judgement on market valuation. Right now I see a lot of reasons that tell me to keep my money out, probably not for very long, but enough to seize opportunities eventually. One thing is for sure, I'm not going to just sit on it, but for the next few days I'm in figuring-things-out mode. Too many things have happened quickly, so I need some points of reference (things have been clearer: fed tapering is hurting emerging markets, emerging markets took socially unsustainable actions to grow over the past decade and it seems to be reckoning time at least in "democracies", Canada is probably on the verge of a big downfall, and US is seen again as a safe(r) haven). There is no foreseeable scenario where I would not put most of my money in the US so worst comes to worst it almost all goes in the S&P, just not while things haven't stabilized.
Yes. The only good news is supposedly a big surplus, but that's thanks to cutting a lot of stuff we need as a society, so long-term effects will be felt eventually. I expect F to use the IMF's statement that Canada doesn't need to keep its budget balanced in the face of a downturn as a reason to push it away and take some tax-cutting actions, and hope to ride that till the election and then win a majority on a "you need us to keep the economy afloat or else it will get worst!" line.
Plugging GreaterFool again:
TD is the same bank that recently adjusted its small print: if you have a variable-rate mortgage and the house falls to 80% of its value, the bank asks you to send them a check to pay for the difference, or else prove them it hasn't fallen that low. That's right, if the market tanks they want you to pay for their loss. It used to have to fall below 75%. They are gearing up for a downfall and so have a lot of companies who have been firing people left and right.
Love this part:
I agree with what you're saying, the problem is that we can't grow the economy forever. At some point we need to mature as a society and live within our means. Growth is not the answer long term, just look at what is going happening to China with their population. Or look at what's happening in the US with social security. Their will be a point where growth is not the answer. What we might disagree on is when we need to start tightening our belts. For me it is sooner rather than later, but I'm a very conservative person. Europe is a more mature society than the US, they will be better in a better position long term.
What will tomorrow bring? Asia is taking a beating.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/03/b...eroding-just-ask-the-business-world.html?_r=0
Good article, which I think explains why a lot of companies are missing their targets. I do find it rather ironic that the business sector is complaining about the eroding middle class though.
Good article, which I think explains why a lot of companies are missing their targets. I do find it rather ironic that the business sector is complaining about the eroding middle class though.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
I'd be curious to see those numbers charted over decades, but yeah, you can't have sustainable growth without an improving middle class. For that to happen, discretionary income must rise through reduction of obligatory expenditures (housing, healthcare, education, transport, energy), and for the later to happen serious investments must be made by the government to push innovation forward where the private sector is not yet willing to do so itself in order to bring down costs. Huge missed opportunity over the past few years due to political bickering and lack of vision.
You either do that or redistribute profits as increased wages, but good luck with that. Might as well spend to do what I described above instead.
Also, we have a big demographics problem in developing countries. You can have 2 people earn a living to make 8 live in a given house, but increasing the number of individuals by 10 won't be sustainable if the house isn't bigger, nor if you can't find 10 times as much food.
In other news: South Korea to Use Name-and-Shame Tool in Boosting Jobs for Women
Japan should take notes.
You either do that or redistribute profits as increased wages, but good luck with that. Might as well spend to do what I described above instead.
Also, we have a big demographics problem in developing countries. You can have 2 people earn a living to make 8 live in a given house, but increasing the number of individuals by 10 won't be sustainable if the house isn't bigger, nor if you can't find 10 times as much food.
In other news: South Korea to Use Name-and-Shame Tool in Boosting Jobs for Women
Japan should take notes.
I don't think that is really going to do much without a serious investment in daycare and childcare (assuming SK situation is similar to JPNs in that regard). Know what would fix all of the problems though? Immigration! get a bunch of immigrants from poor countries to look after all of the working moms' kids and the whole world's problems would be solved. To bad people are stupid, nationalistic or prejudiced.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Well that's not happening elsewhere so I don't see why South Korea or Japan would have to do that. Why not just subsidize daycare? It's not that costly especially if coupled with preschool education. Better doing that than simply importing cheap labor, which to support what you describe would have to be forcefully kept poor, basically creating a second class.
In Brazil you have such class disparity that your average middle class single person has someone doing their laundry and cleaning up their house, if not cooking for them. I don't think it's a good model.
It was more of a joke because it will never happen, but I truly think that we would all be better off if it did. I also never said that they should be kept poor or that the government shouldnt subsidize it. Simply put, immigrants do less skilled work, but make a lot more money than they would at home, which would allow the moms to go to work. Not really sure how this would create a permanent second class since I would hope that their children would be educated and have a good opportunity to succeed. Would you need to to let in more immigrants then? probably, but I think thats pretty necessary considering SK and JPN's population issue. I am also not nearly as optimistic as you on automation and technology making up for this.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
I bought TTWO today after its 12% drop. Looks like a decent price to me, always a buyout potential too, and fairly confident on the long term.
Yeah, seems like a good price to get in, typical market overreaction today, or the big fish are tired of the lack of info into the pipeline.
Meanwhile others like EA or Zynga guide lower or keep having losses, and their stock goes up in value.
Whoever said markets are rational is an idiot.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
And P/E is very low for T2.
Disney earnings tomorrow. If it tanks I'll buy back into it.
I bought FIW (First Trust ISE Water Index Fund ) btw today, for my tax-free account. Long term ETF investment.
BTW anyone knows why Northrop rose so much in 2013? I'd like to buy into it, the P/E is low, but I'm curious about such a rapid rise in the stock price.
edit: Seems it happened with the whole sector at the same time. Defense stocks are really high for whatever reason, many at an all time high. Anyone know why? I tried finding info but see nothing in particular. Makes me hesitant to buy eithe XAR or ITA (etfs) now. Looking at the P/E of each companies some are good, some are a bit high for their sector.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
They issued a guidance warning. I bought some, and a lower position in SSYS (even if I prefer this company, I'm guessing it has its own chance of falling further later).
Got lucky cause I sold both monday
edit: Already up 10% on DDD, lol.
Got lucky cause I sold both monday
edit: Already up 10% on DDD, lol.
RumblingRosco
Member
-
FB is the way to go!
Growth isn't necessarily driven by population growth. It is driven by increasing productivity. That happens primarily with Science and Engineering. If a Graphene CPU running at 20 GHz came out in a few years, it would accelerate CPU intense research in biology and physics, leading to new technologies that increase productivity output. That can go on for a long time. Way past our lifetimes. We're not special.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
I did good in selling everything Monday, had to to be able to buy things on big dips.
Ended up 13% and 5.64% on DDD and SSYS after selling them earlier this week and buying again this morning. Up 8% since yesterday on TTWO after it tanked, and bought back into DIS today after having sold it Monday as well, which released good earnings tonight; really, can't imagine any reason not to have faith in DIS, even if cinemas went caput they'd figure things out, and they are unlikely to be targets of anti-monopoly regulations due to the market they operate in attracting less attention on that front. Of course none of this particularly matters over such a short term, the markets are no less worrying than they were Monday.
Now if SCTY and TLSA can tank, that would be great
Ended up 13% and 5.64% on DDD and SSYS after selling them earlier this week and buying again this morning. Up 8% since yesterday on TTWO after it tanked, and bought back into DIS today after having sold it Monday as well, which released good earnings tonight; really, can't imagine any reason not to have faith in DIS, even if cinemas went caput they'd figure things out, and they are unlikely to be targets of anti-monopoly regulations due to the market they operate in attracting less attention on that front. Of course none of this particularly matters over such a short term, the markets are no less worrying than they were Monday.
Now if SCTY and TLSA can tank, that would be great
I feel TWTR is the better bet long-term. It just seems way more relevant than FB already
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
I don't see how when it comes to making money. Twitter knows very little of its users, so it can have a lot of trouble targeting ads, especially without making Twitter itself more cumbersome to the users. I see very little that would allow Twitter to make serious money without hurting its usability, unlike Facebook.
Friend of mine just told me about a zero-commission, no minimum account balance stock brokerage: Robinhood
You have to sign up for early access but seems pretty awesome. Take a look GAF.
Also: Some background on Robinhood.
You have to sign up for early access but seems pretty awesome. Take a look GAF.
Also: Some background on Robinhood.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Yelp is worth 6B????? hahahahahaha
I guess it could. If they somehow are getting lots of revenue from restaurants, then I see it being viable. Because of there's advertising mixed in there, it's way more effective than being spammed prescription drug commercials that I'll never use.
Shuffled around and set up most of my portfolio today.
Questrade customer service better not have lied to me when they said their commission-free promo also applied to selling ETF's. (Buying ETF's is free anyway).
The only thing I have left to do is pick a couple individual stocks to invest in with disposable "play money".
Still very, very happy with NDN.TO. Got upgraded from hold to buy, too.
Questrade customer service better not have lied to me when they said their commission-free promo also applied to selling ETF's. (Buying ETF's is free anyway).
The only thing I have left to do is pick a couple individual stocks to invest in with disposable "play money".
Still very, very happy with NDN.TO. Got upgraded from hold to buy, too.
I think you called it correctly, well done!
Someone could fart in the wrong direction and the markets would go down 5%. I wouldn't speak certainties, but I thing the fundamentals are strong so that by end of 2014 and as we go through the next few years, the market is going to do a bit more than the long term average of 9%.
The great thing about the stock market is that any dip is a bear trap. Long term it goes up.
Financial cause and effect at a daily basis is hart to really connect. Just today a BBC story said that unemployment in the US dropped considerably less than the market expected, and yet everything is up 1% today.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
That's called a bear trap, not a bull trap. A bull trap is when you think things are going up and then they go down.
I wish Etrade would hurry the fuck up on my tax documents. They post that stuff at the last second. IRS's deadline is the 18th. Glad I don't have anymore stuff to sell there.
For Vanguard in Turbotax you just specify that you need to import from them, give you login info, and done. Vanguard posted the stuff 2 weeks ago.
For Vanguard in Turbotax you just specify that you need to import from them, give you login info, and done. Vanguard posted the stuff 2 weeks ago.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Difficult to decide if I should buy some TSLA at the current price. Sold when I did my reshuffle. I feel like waiting for after earnings, but regardless of how earnings turn out it could go up or down as often happens. So I'll wait. Current the market cap is a bit high IMO, at more than 1/3 of Honda's, nearly half of Ford's.
Keeping an eye on Solar City, hoping for it to go down.
Keeping an eye on Solar City, hoping for it to go down.
How does Twitter know very little of its users? Part of their business (albeit a small part) is to collect and sell off user-related data. Who someone follows, re-tweets, and what hash tags someone uses tells a lot about a person, so I doubt targeted ads are Twitter's biggest concern. I think a potential problem for Twitter is simply its limited ad space. Can't really have too many ads without cluttering up the interface and discouraging users.
Is Facebook sustainable though? I would say Twitter is in the better position in the long run mainly because it's content is designed to be consumed for an on-the-go smartphone world. It's also aligned with the trend of instant content consumption through its real-time component; people are interested in what's happening live, right now. Maybe Twitter won't make as much money as Facebook in the near term, but I think Twitter is better aligned with where we're headed.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Would you follow "Terminator 2" on Twitter? No, you'd just get random "Have you seen this person?" tweets from someone with a T1000 avatar.
On Facebook, yes, I "liked" Terminator 2, and as a result will end up seeing advertising related to this in some way. I liked the Lord of the Rings books, or Tolkien, or Kanye West, but would I really want to follow Kanye on Twitter? Not so much. I love hockey, but do I really want to follow my team's Twitter feed? No.
And you talk about real-time content, maybe you misunderstand how Facebook can be used. I have an Interest List titled "Photography", I click on it and see all updates of every photographer I follow. Same for Music, etc. Twitter is a joke compared to this. It has nothing that Facebook doesn't have, and FB has all of it better anyway in terms of how useful the data is from an advertising point of view.
And as you said, they can't even show their advertising without destroying the usefulness of Twitter (whatever usefulness there really is to it). The only thing Twitter really has is: keep the messages to 140 characters.
It would be funny if FB added a "Feebee" feature, which would just be posts limited to 140 characters. What now?
Facebook is basically the internet, in real-time, filtered to my liking/interests/needs. It's the clearest most useful picture an advertiser could have from someone. They could add a "where do you want to go on vacation" feature, people would write in the places, and bam, people get advertising they actually want for tickets or hotels. Twitter can't.
On Facebook, yes, I "liked" Terminator 2, and as a result will end up seeing advertising related to this in some way. I liked the Lord of the Rings books, or Tolkien, or Kanye West, but would I really want to follow Kanye on Twitter? Not so much. I love hockey, but do I really want to follow my team's Twitter feed? No.
And you talk about real-time content, maybe you misunderstand how Facebook can be used. I have an Interest List titled "Photography", I click on it and see all updates of every photographer I follow. Same for Music, etc. Twitter is a joke compared to this. It has nothing that Facebook doesn't have, and FB has all of it better anyway in terms of how useful the data is from an advertising point of view.
And as you said, they can't even show their advertising without destroying the usefulness of Twitter (whatever usefulness there really is to it). The only thing Twitter really has is: keep the messages to 140 characters.
It would be funny if FB added a "Feebee" feature, which would just be posts limited to 140 characters. What now?
Facebook is basically the internet, in real-time, filtered to my liking/interests/needs. It's the clearest most useful picture an advertiser could have from someone. They could add a "where do you want to go on vacation" feature, people would write in the places, and bam, people get advertising they actually want for tickets or hotels. Twitter can't.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
How is Twitter more real-time?
And you don't have to be friends with an athlete to follow him, they usually have a page of their own, just like it, and you can nicely classify that under "Sports" interest list. Some people even allow others to follow them without having an extra page, so you'll see only stuff not set to be seen only by friends.
They should have premium subscription based twitter feeds that you have to pay to follow.
FINALFANTASYDOG
Member
Heya Everyone, I've gotten so in love with day-trading, but I'm finding it's costing me money(not a huge amount, have lost 4000$ in 3 months off a top of being up $2500, oh Amazon how you have hurt me)
I would been even more in the red if it wasn't for sheer-out gambles I did that paid off(thank you shorting twitter)
So my question is: I love high-value real money day trading, it makes me so intrigued in business / keeping up with the world, makes me feel like I have a productive hobby.
But what's the best way to learn how to day trade at break-even or minimal losses?
Every post / book I've found seems to either be about how to make $$$$$$ 1000%, trade penny stocks nonsense or the opposite end, that 70% of day-traders go bankrupt in a year.
I'm not at all interested in making more then a 7% profit and willing to accept a 3000$~ loss a year to play the day-trading game
What do you suggest: Blue chip stocks that aren't going to majorly swing on me? Taking neutral positions every day in the market?
Any reading suggestions?
Again Just want a strategy that will end me up around even / slight loss at the end of the day, while still doing high-value day-trading in the stock market.
Yes, I realize that I'm guaranteed more money if I don't day-trade, that's not my point here, it's to enjoy day-trading
I would been even more in the red if it wasn't for sheer-out gambles I did that paid off(thank you shorting twitter)
So my question is: I love high-value real money day trading, it makes me so intrigued in business / keeping up with the world, makes me feel like I have a productive hobby.
But what's the best way to learn how to day trade at break-even or minimal losses?
Every post / book I've found seems to either be about how to make $$$$$$ 1000%, trade penny stocks nonsense or the opposite end, that 70% of day-traders go bankrupt in a year.
I'm not at all interested in making more then a 7% profit and willing to accept a 3000$~ loss a year to play the day-trading game
What do you suggest: Blue chip stocks that aren't going to majorly swing on me? Taking neutral positions every day in the market?
Any reading suggestions?
Again Just want a strategy that will end me up around even / slight loss at the end of the day, while still doing high-value day-trading in the stock market.
Yes, I realize that I'm guaranteed more money if I don't day-trade, that's not my point here, it's to enjoy day-trading
Research, read, learn, use simulation trading. Do that for a few months and see how you do.
Once you get it down though, it's pretty incredible. I made $4k today alone doing a few flips on a couple stocks.
FINALFANTASYDOG
Member
There's people that spend $5,000 a year on on the equivalent of clicking cows in a fantasy land(no blame to them, do what you love to do!) At least Day-trading keeps me in the loop to the business world, has the potential to make a profit....
Similar threads
- Locked