What do you have invested?

[innonimatu]

Then again, I'm atypical since the darling is a citizen of the Unitary Republic. I also hold more than just Australian citizenship and am looking to expand that in politcally safer directions.

You don't think Australia is politically safe?

 

[LucyDuke]

My account ran a profit but I made a bad choice with IRE.

In your account, what did you start with, and what would you have ended with without your father's money?

 

[Hygro]

Tanicius, there's so much bleeding of whose money went where and how much was made under what way you are classifying gains and losses.

For example, in a not-real-money competition, I put a 7% stake of my fund in SOLR to hedge against one of the other plays. The day I bought it, as it had dropped dramatically, I gained like 2% on my trade. The next day, that 2% turned into a 5%. 5% gains in two days! Then of course friday it was down to -1%.

I would only describe that scenario as a 1% loss. I not describe it as a big gain, and then through in a caveat that it had also lost later. That is confusing the issue, and ultimately misleading.

 

[Tani Coyote]

In your account, what did you start with, and what would you have ended with without your father's money?

Started with 1488, ended up with 1100.

I would only describe that scenario as a 1% loss. I not describe it as a big gain, and then through in a caveat that it had also lost later. That is confusing the issue, and ultimately misleading.

It's easy.

His account - 20.0%.
My account - 19.5%.

 

[JollyRoger]

You should have invested it with me - I would have moved you 100% in the direction you claim as a gain.

 

[Mise]

Started with 1488, ended up with 1100.



It's easy.

His account - 20.0%.
My account - 19.5%.

But that's not really true, because your investment in Bank of Ireland wiped out that 19.5%. If I'm reading your reply to Lucy right, your account made -26%. Then, your dad gave you an extra $678 for free, leaving you with $1,778 -- i.e. a 19.5% gain over the original $1488. But as an investor, you made a massive loss. If you're going to learn from this at all (which is really the only reason to play around with ~$1500 of stocks), you have to be honest about your gains and losses. It seems as though you're even lying to yourself -- which is a god damn terrible sign. If you're lying to yourself about a few hundred dollars, what are you going to be like when you start playing with tens of thousands of your own money? It's a dangerous, worrying sign.

Have you sold IRE yet, or are you waiting for it to come back up?

 

[Masada]

You don't think Australia is politically safe?

Eh, it isn’t the best citizenship to hold in Indonesia (1955, 1963-1966, 1998 and on-going). New Zealand citizenship is far and above better because it’s the smaller and less obnoxious. Being Maori is also a good thing, something about speaking a Malayo-Polynesian language and being a colonised people. The British suffer from history (1955 and 1963-1966) and the large, relative, numbers of their obnoxious countrymen stalking around. Irish citizenship is attractive, but I’d need to investigate it. And you couldn’t pay me to adopt Singaporean citizenship (due the military service and the whole Chinese thing). Also, Singaporeans suffer from much the same problem as the Brits do in having a large number of obnoxious countrymen already in the country.

 

[Tani Coyote]

But that's not really true, because your investment in Bank of Ireland wiped out that 19.5%. If I'm reading your reply to Lucy right, your account made -26%. Then, your dad gave you an extra $678 for free, leaving you with $1,778 -- i.e. a 19.5% gain over the original $1488. But as an investor, you made a massive loss.

Well yeah, of course I did. However, the loss is only on paper. I can ignore it this time around since it was insured.

Now as for next time...

If you're going to learn from this at all (which is really the only reason to play around with ~$1500 of stocks), you have to be honest about your gains and losses. It seems as though you're even lying to yourself -- which is a god damn terrible sign. If you're lying to yourself about a few hundred dollars, what are you going to be like when you start playing with tens of thousands of your own money? It's a dangerous, worrying sign.

I'm not lying to myself. I understand the loss happened, but it was covered. I can write this one off for now.

It was a learning experience, which really, was why he subsidised it, I'd imagine. He wanted me to take risks. I don't think he was counting on me being wise to the whole "cover the loss" part and realising I could take an enormous risk accordingly, however.

Have you sold IRE yet, or are you waiting for it to come back up?

We're short on money at the moment, so I've kept the stock. Who knows, it could go back up(joys of it being a state-backed bank!), or it could drop. I might as well keep it in there for the time being.

 

[JerichoHill]

Ignoring the loss ignores the lesson.

Keeping a bad stock is also a bad idea. It is a bad stock. You sell it.

Stick to long-term trading kid. I told you short-term stuff was dicey.

 

[Mise]

Hygro made a thread recently where he got some good advice from an investment banker: "Would you buy it today? Even if you already own it, would you buy it today? That's what you need to ask yourself."

If you didn't already own it, would you buy IRE again today? If not, then it's rational to sell it. The decision isn't "should I buy or should I sell"; the decision is "is it better to have this stock or to not have this stock". The answer to the 2nd question is true no matter if you already own it or not.

 

[Tani Coyote]

Ignoring the loss ignores the lesson.

I'm not ignoring it... I just don't need to factor it in since the loss was virtual this time around.

Keeping a bad stock is also a bad idea. It is a bad stock. You sell it.

If I sell it now, I don't get anything. I will sell it once there's money to pay off the loss available.

Stick to long-term trading kid. I told you short-term stuff was dicey.

It was only dicey on my end, not my father's. I did not have the capital to sustain it.

If you didn't already own it, would you buy IRE again today? If not, then it's rational to sell it. The decision isn't "should I buy or should I sell"; the decision is "is it better to have this stock or to not have this stock". The answer to the 2nd question is true no matter if you already own it or not.

If I sell it, I get nothing. That's why I'm keeping it until money's available to pay off the loss.

 

[nonconformist]

Heard about the guy who fell off a skyscraper? On his way down past each floor, he kept saying to reassure himself: So far so good... so far so good... so far so good. How you fall doesn't matter. It's how you land!

 

[Tani Coyote]

I will not be short-term trading myself anymore short of a massive profit falling into my lap (as rarely does happen) and my loss is insured. I learned my lesson and I got off scotch-free. I'd say I landed quite well!

 

[nonconformist]

yeah, it's always easier thwn you have daddy to pick up the pieces.

 

[Tani Coyote]

yeah, it's always easier thwn you have daddy to pick up the pieces.

Well yeah, that's the point. I wasn't really investing my money, so he said if I took a risk, he'd cover any loss that followed.

So, I took him up on it. Since I had nothing to lose and everything to gain, I logically chose a high-risk investment.

He knew what he was getting into.

I wouldn't have done the investment if not for his offer.

 

[nonconformist]

idiocy is a benefit of privilege.

Moderator Action: Flaming.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Mise]

There's high risk and then there's stupid.

And then there's Bank of Ireland.

 

[Tani Coyote]

I'll just add that we were always taught to seize opportunity. My father gave me one, I took it.

There's high risk and then there's stupid.

And then there's Bank of Ireland.

Bank of Ireland is a major stock that has the risk/payout of a penny stock. Or at least, it used to. Now it's just become a pair of conrete shoes.

Ah well!

It didn't pay out, but if it had...

 

[nonconformist]

There's high risk and then there's stupid.

And then there's Bank of Ireland.

For everything else, there's Lehmann Brothers

[QUOTE-Tanicius Fox]It didn't pay out, but if it had... [/QUOTE]
These are the words of a compulsive gambler, destined to get deeper and deeper in debt, as he sucks on his Special Brew.

 

[Godwynn]

Not if you have everything set up so you can't lose.

No such thing.

If you place a limit order to buy something at 10.00, and then another to sell at 10.10, you can't lose, since, provided it's a big stock at least, it's almost guaranteed to reach that point eventually given how things fluctuate.

Of course, that kind of takes away from the "day" part, but hey, even if you lose that day, no reason to sell. You just wait until it goes back up. May take a few days, but... hey, profit is profit.

It's a lot easier working with absolute numbers than percentages though for obvious reasons; Pepsi is very fond of switching 40-50 cents a day. 1-2%, though? Not as likely by a large margin.

You said you can't lose, but you did.

What happened here?