Tradefair & Financials
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
He doesn't have to answer sh1t. Why don't the wise guys on here who are beating up on Mrben post your detail analysis to prove how equities are a better investment if you include dividends.
And make sure you don't forget to factor in on what would the S&P index would look like today had they kept in all the companies that now lie in the bankruptcy cemetery and were removed from the index and replaced by others to keep the index artificially high. And yes, do please include that nasty little detail called inflation.
It's easy to beat up on someone on here without offering a single shred of analysis but then again it's typical of this forum, innit?
And make sure you don't forget to factor in on what would the S&P index would look like today had they kept in all the companies that now lie in the bankruptcy cemetery and were removed from the index and replaced by others to keep the index artificially high. And yes, do please include that nasty little detail called inflation.
It's easy to beat up on someone on here without offering a single shred of analysis but then again it's typical of this forum, innit?
Show More
you're right, he doesn't have to answer sh!t. he can just invent complex persecution fantasies instead, rather than learning some simple financial basics :D
You are full of cr@p as usual. The burden is on you to PROVE him wrong, not the other way around. You haven't provided a shred of evidence that you are right. And you know why.......it's because you don't have any.
You keep bringing up 1980 when the price of gold spiked for a day in January whereas the average for that year is almost $300 lower (have look at the data if you don't believe me: http://www.kitco.com/script/hist_charts_yearly_graphs.pix). If you don't recognize that as an aberration your are either naive or clueless. And of, by the way, what cost $835 in 1980 would cost $2150 in 2009, and that's using the USG's highly corrupted published inflation numbers (the methodology has changed several times since then with the intention of keeping the number low, actual inflation is a lot higher in case you haven't clued in).
You keep mentioning dividends without providing a shred of analysis what these look like over time. Who paid them and how much? What do they look like when they are inflation adjusted? You still haven't answered the question, what would the S&P index look like today if all the companies that were removed over the years were still kept in and calculated at zero?
Your hubris in trashing other people's posts is beyond belief. It seems the expectation is that we accept what you say as gospel, just because you said it. You disagreed with something that was posted. Take the time to refute what was posted by posting analysis, not insults ("school boy error"). Mrben's original post made a statement and referenced his source, beyond that the burden of proof if you don't agree is on you, not him.
You keep bringing up 1980 when the price of gold spiked for a day in January whereas the average for that year is almost $300 lower (have look at the data if you don't believe me: http://www.kitco.com/script/hist_charts_yearly_graphs.pix). If you don't recognize that as an aberration your are either naive or clueless. And of, by the way, what cost $835 in 1980 would cost $2150 in 2009, and that's using the USG's highly corrupted published inflation numbers (the methodology has changed several times since then with the intention of keeping the number low, actual inflation is a lot higher in case you haven't clued in).
You keep mentioning dividends without providing a shred of analysis what these look like over time. Who paid them and how much? What do they look like when they are inflation adjusted? You still haven't answered the question, what would the S&P index look like today if all the companies that were removed over the years were still kept in and calculated at zero?
Your hubris in trashing other people's posts is beyond belief. It seems the expectation is that we accept what you say as gospel, just because you said it. You disagreed with something that was posted. Take the time to refute what was posted by posting analysis, not insults ("school boy error"). Mrben's original post made a statement and referenced his source, beyond that the burden of proof if you don't agree is on you, not him.
One could also have invested $10,000 in MED at 0.19 a share in 1999.
Today my investment would be worth $1,112,631 and I haven't even bothered to count up the dividends.
Makes gold look pretty average?
To rubbish stock investments, or any other, because you can wind back the clock and make unfavourable or favourable comparisons seems only of academic interest. As they say, that is no guarantee of future performance.
People will adopt their own investment strategies. Rubbishing a method without knowing the motives behind it first, is showing a somewhat blinkered approach.
Instead of haranguing people for taking a differing investment strategy from their own, they might first ask what prompted their approach.
Today my investment would be worth $1,112,631 and I haven't even bothered to count up the dividends.
Makes gold look pretty average?
To rubbish stock investments, or any other, because you can wind back the clock and make unfavourable or favourable comparisons seems only of academic interest. As they say, that is no guarantee of future performance.
People will adopt their own investment strategies. Rubbishing a method without knowing the motives behind it first, is showing a somewhat blinkered approach.
Instead of haranguing people for taking a differing investment strategy from their own, they might first ask what prompted their approach.
Mrben 26 Feb 13:50
Then we have the ones with multiple forum names, hiding behind a different name pretending to back up their own ideas under the pretense of being someone else.Thats even worse than pathetic
i'm starting to see a pattern here, MrBean... sorry, I mean Menelaus ;)
Then we have the ones with multiple forum names, hiding behind a different name pretending to back up their own ideas under the pretense of being someone else.Thats even worse than pathetic
i'm starting to see a pattern here, MrBean... sorry, I mean Menelaus ;)
@ M as a H
Or perhaps you can invest your entire holdings in a penny stock that goes to two pennies the next day and you double your money
Or better yet, you can buy a EuroMillions ticket and win £56m like the Gloucestershire couple Justine Laycock and Nigel Page
When you can pick and chose your sample size of success stories, anything is possible
The original post here is whether gold outperformed the S&A in the time frame that was selected. The post came under attack for the time frame selected and the lack of including cash flows.
My position is that harping on the 1980 spike in the price of gold is a red herring and that even when you include dividends adjusted for inflation, gold still outperforms given where we are at today. Also, I'm arguing the the S&P index is artificially higher today from where it would have been had failed companies were not replaced on the index over the years.
@ SUB
Seriously, that's all you have to say?
Or perhaps you can invest your entire holdings in a penny stock that goes to two pennies the next day and you double your money
Or better yet, you can buy a EuroMillions ticket and win £56m like the Gloucestershire couple Justine Laycock and Nigel Page
When you can pick and chose your sample size of success stories, anything is possible
The original post here is whether gold outperformed the S&A in the time frame that was selected. The post came under attack for the time frame selected and the lack of including cash flows.
My position is that harping on the 1980 spike in the price of gold is a red herring and that even when you include dividends adjusted for inflation, gold still outperforms given where we are at today. Also, I'm arguing the the S&P index is artificially higher today from where it would have been had failed companies were not replaced on the index over the years.
@ SUB
Seriously, that's all you have to say?
One more thought, admittedly outside of the scope of this thread, when considering investment decisions you ought to look at the current S&P P/E ratio and compare that with historical norms. Where will the S&P be if the P/E ratio reverts to normal.
But then again you can get lucky and land on that one stock that skies in a few days and make millions.
Never mind.
But then again you can get lucky and land on that one stock that skies in a few days and make millions.
Never mind.
Menelaus 27 Feb 13:43
When you can pick and chose your sample size of success stories, anything is possible
glad that we both agree that this approach is ridiculous Menelaus, maybe we can convince your alter ego of this too
When you can pick and chose your sample size of success stories, anything is possible
glad that we both agree that this approach is ridiculous Menelaus, maybe we can convince your alter ego of this too
Look guy im not being picky but your post "stocks ARE a woeful investment" is present tense,your 1999 ten year example is PAST tense.You obviously mean they WERE a bad investment.So how about now?
Sub, you were always good at shouting "hey, look what's over there" every time someone put you in a corner on this forum. You believe that Mrben is "my alter ego" as much as I believe you are the Dalai Lama but when everything else fails, well, let's just try setting up a diversion.
Either that, or you've totally lost the plot.
If accuse anyone on this forum that they've just made a "school boy error", I offer evidence and facts to prove why. Obviously you feel you are above such nuisances. Like I said earlier, your hubris is beyond belief.
Either that, or you've totally lost the plot.
If accuse anyone on this forum that they've just made a "school boy error", I offer evidence and facts to prove why. Obviously you feel you are above such nuisances. Like I said earlier, your hubris is beyond belief.
And let's face it, you know all there is to know about hubris.
Btw what happened to your " intelligent " suggestion that I was Mr B at one stage.
He certainly does appear to be a man of many colours.
Whoever he is, he does appear to be a very lucky trader, maybe just on a good streak.
All harmless enough. Not worth anybody getting their knickers in a twist , I would have thought.
He certainly does appear to be a man of many colours.
Whoever he is, he does appear to be a very lucky trader, maybe just on a good streak.
All harmless enough. Not worth anybody getting their knickers in a twist , I would have thought.
Look guys do yourself a favour,if your all good at various things why dont you all have a brainstorming weekend together on here.If you all come up with the same share or idea for a business venture then it must be a good investment?
Verbally or mentally headbutting each other becomes counter-productive after a while,so why not bury the hatchet and go straight to the million pound payoff.
Its said that everybody has a novel in them,that they can write one good story,but probably only one.Likewise people probably have one good business idea or an intuitive share buy that makes them a fortune.So how about it,seems the logical way to go for all of you.
Verbally or mentally headbutting each other becomes counter-productive after a while,so why not bury the hatchet and go straight to the million pound payoff.
Its said that everybody has a novel in them,that they can write one good story,but probably only one.Likewise people probably have one good business idea or an intuitive share buy that makes them a fortune.So how about it,seems the logical way to go for all of you.
PMSL Menelaus, its always fun watching you run around in circles and tie yourself in knots
my dividend comment was an extension of a previous conversation with MrBean on the same topic, but of course you already knew this when you barged in with your typical self-righteous indignation act :D
you've diverted yourself as usual Menelaus, but its always entertaining
at least when you get a lecture on hubris and arrogance from Menelaus, you know you're being lectured by a true master of those subjects :D
my dividend comment was an extension of a previous conversation with MrBean on the same topic, but of course you already knew this when you barged in with your typical self-righteous indignation act :D
you've diverted yourself as usual Menelaus, but its always entertaining
at least when you get a lecture on hubris and arrogance from Menelaus, you know you're being lectured by a true master of those subjects :D
In your dreams I'm afraid.
It doesn't work that way unfortunately.
It doesn't work that way unfortunately.
I read what you say Botty,but the C.I.A.and all top companies put all info together and are successful in what they do,so why this mind-set.?
lolol pipes, thats a lovely idea but I dont think it can work.Too many guys here are more interested in being right OR bagging others.Barely any creative thinkers.Take botty, he's a "the sky must be blue and all the lights must be green before I go "guy.Thats his method.I'm a "lets trade now" type of guy.Both methods are legitimate.There are a lot of guys here who are r" everyoneone who has an opinion/idea is wrong unless I agree with it".
There are so many guys here who's obsession it is that they MUST be right!.They would not be suited for the CIA idea. Making $$$ in trading is not about being right, its about making $$$. I made a mild observation on one of my post that the GPD may rise this week, lol it dropped 175 pips since then.Now would I buy it because I wanted to be "right"?Not likely.In fact I wished I did trade it because what a fantastic opportunity it was.
Take the AUD trade I suggested, definitly its not about being right, its about watching the price action b4 the event and trading accordingly.Ive done this trade successfully probably 8 times in a row now.Twice there was no money to be made but all the other times its been a marvellous trade so I will do it again.
Its just like the dow- sell it around 10,500/600 and buy it around 10,000.Gold- buy around just under 1100 and sell over 1120, oil buy at 75 sell at 80.Everything is range trading now, theres no up trend, no downtrend.Its pretty straight 4ward.But get these guys in a room to agree to that, lol they will tell you they need to go back to 1980 data to confirm that the dow is range trading in 2010 hahhahahaha.
Oh well pipes, its still a good idea.
I wonder how the CIA do those think tanks successfully? Oh I know- they encourage creative thinking, just the opposite of this forum.
There are so many guys here who's obsession it is that they MUST be right!.They would not be suited for the CIA idea. Making $$$ in trading is not about being right, its about making $$$. I made a mild observation on one of my post that the GPD may rise this week, lol it dropped 175 pips since then.Now would I buy it because I wanted to be "right"?Not likely.In fact I wished I did trade it because what a fantastic opportunity it was.
Take the AUD trade I suggested, definitly its not about being right, its about watching the price action b4 the event and trading accordingly.Ive done this trade successfully probably 8 times in a row now.Twice there was no money to be made but all the other times its been a marvellous trade so I will do it again.
Its just like the dow- sell it around 10,500/600 and buy it around 10,000.Gold- buy around just under 1100 and sell over 1120, oil buy at 75 sell at 80.Everything is range trading now, theres no up trend, no downtrend.Its pretty straight 4ward.But get these guys in a room to agree to that, lol they will tell you they need to go back to 1980 data to confirm that the dow is range trading in 2010 hahhahahaha.
Oh well pipes, its still a good idea.
I wonder how the CIA do those think tanks successfully? Oh I know- they encourage creative thinking, just the opposite of this forum.
You're using CIA think tanks as a role model in constructive thinking ?
Now that is funny.
Btw Mr B , you're a bit wrong in your assessment of me.
I do take substantial investment risks. Just in a different manner to you.
And no I do not care to elaborate further, as it is not in my interests in the slightest to do so.
This and all forums are like a shooting gallery.
Some of us like to be shooters and others like to be targets.
None of us are required to justify what we are. We just are.
Now that is funny.
Btw Mr B , you're a bit wrong in your assessment of me.
I do take substantial investment risks. Just in a different manner to you.
And no I do not care to elaborate further, as it is not in my interests in the slightest to do so.
This and all forums are like a shooting gallery.
Some of us like to be shooters and others like to be targets.
None of us are required to justify what we are. We just are.
well said botty.Understood. Btw if you ever want to exchange ideas my email is
mrben_2005@yahoo.com.au
Would be interested in hearing how you manage those risks.Cheers.
mrben_2005@yahoo.com.au
Would be interested in hearing how you manage those risks.Cheers.
Exchange ideas?!?!?
What is this, an Abbott and Costello routine over email?
Why don't you use this as a template:
CLOWN 1: blah blah blah blah
CLOWN 2 : blah blah blah blah
CLOWN 1: yes but blah blah blah
CLOWN 2: sure but blah blah blah
That about sums it up.
What is this, an Abbott and Costello routine over email?
Why don't you use this as a template:
CLOWN 1: blah blah blah blah
CLOWN 2 : blah blah blah blah
CLOWN 1: yes but blah blah blah
CLOWN 2: sure but blah blah blah
That about sums it up.
Mrben,youve got it right,in a nutshell,mirrors exactly what i was thinking,lots of luck on your trades.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539