writser

PM me if you want to invest in my startup. It is about drones delivering packages efficiently thanks to deep learning strategies controlled by smart contracts on a custom blockchain. First come, first serve.

My point was that even playing halfway decent in a homegame with friends is so boring that I usually play like a total clown for ten hands, go bust and then wonder why I bothered to join the game .. /offtopic: I really enjoy chess as well. Unfortunately I only started playing in my late twenties so I'll probably never get good at tactics despite my practicing. I joined a chess class for a while and the kids always were better tactically. It's really amazing how quick young kids can pick that up. I learned how to beat them in competitive games though: feed them red bull and candy and spend 30 minutes on your first 5 moves :P . I never tried bridge. Probably a fun game too but only so much you can master.

Good point (doesn't bode well for my investment career ...). However, I think that IF you have the capabilities to be good in both, poker serves as a nice training ground. Fast-paced, lots of clear moments to make decisions and relatively easy to judge your decision-making in hindsight. @Travis: interesting that you still like the homegames. I can't play them seriously anymore. What's the point of folding for hours to outplay your friends for a $5 pot? If no money is (or token amounts are) on the line, there are dozens of board / card games I'd rather play. I guess I just lost interest. Or I am a thrill-seeking gambling addict. Probably a bit of both :) .

There are lots of players on this board, just search this forum for 'poker'. During the boom I played semi-professionally for a while, both on- and offline. I was a marginally winning player, others on this forum did much better than I did. Nevertheless I'm glad I did it. I agree that if you really study the game there are a lot of concepts that also apply to investing (i.e. focusing on the process rather than the outcome, always weighing a range of future scenarios, bankroll management, etc.). What I appreciate the most afterwards though is that a short stint of full-time poker had the side effect of being a crash course on money management & psychology. Feeling like shit after blowing half your bankroll or after losing a big pot as a massive favorite. Forcing bad plays because you are tired of getting dealt bad cards. Trying to get 'break-even'. Feeling miserable or euphoric simply due to variance. Seeing others go broke because of terrible risk management. Realizing that those who talk the loudest and have the strongest opinions are not necessarily the best players. Being tricked by angle-shooters. Learning that you don't make good decisions when you are tired, drunk, euphoric or angry. Understanding that frictional costs like rake and tips have a big influence on your profitability and that table-selection is perhaps more important than playing well. You can read all the books you want but I think you actually have to experience these things to really understand the importance of rationality, patience, risk management and emotional control when large sums of money are involved. You have to experience losing money to get good at it :) . And because poker is much more fast-paced than investing I think you can master (or at least understand) these concepts way faster playing poker than managing your portfolio. Feedback in investing is far more vague and longer-term, which makes it a much harder environment to learn anything. In investing you can have, for example, a portfolio with a 100% VRX allocation and feel for a decade you are the smartest guy on the planet. That said, I don't play poker anymore. Frankly the game was mostly interesting to me as a means to increase my net worth. Nowadays the games are too tough for that, especially online. And real-life poker is so slow and boring if you are used to online multi-tabling. Sitting the whole evening at a table with 8 salty grinders drinking sparkling water while trying to bust the single fish is just such a nightmare .. I currently think investing is a much broader and more intellectually rewarding 'game' than poker. Also, poker doesn't scale well - with investing your profits are a percentage of your net worth. With poker that is not the case unless you are playing with Andy Beal.

Bold prediction ..

DMTX, seems like a low-risk deal, spread looks juicy & can be hedged if you want to. 3828:HK, long-term holding, great 6m results, implying ex-cash P/E ~4.5. Activists forced the company to return cash to shareholders. Added to my position today.

Thanks for your kind words but let me assure you I don't always walk away with a nice gain. Floyd has to keep boxing for a few more centuries before I recoup my losses in maternity clothing, amongst others ;). With regards to gambling taxes: that's a huge mystery here. As far as I know 1) online gambling is illegal for me but 2) I have to pay 29% taxes over winnings unless 3) the illegal online casino has its HQ in the EU. There are running lawsuits, counter-lawsuits, etc. etc. It's a big clusterfuck, our gambling laws are still from the 1960's and the state-owned casino doesn't want to give up its monopoly (they argue they are afraid that will lead to 'irresponsible gambling' ...). I think I'm doing everything by the law - if you see some posts disappearing in this topic I've changed my mind! How does it work in the Nordics?

There is definitely some money in bonus whoring though, a nice way to start a bankroll if you are a student or something. But it doesn't scale very well and the playing field is not level - bookies will try to screw you if you're not a regular punter. I'm sure the statistical / analytical approach of sports betting can be profitable too (probably scales better as well) but I'm no expert on that. I don't think it's easy. I placed a small 4 digit bet for a ~20% gain after exchange fees, fx fees etc. Again, I don't know anything about boxing. I also didn't like the heads-I-win-a-bit / tails-I-lose-it-all characteristics of the Mayweather bet. I guess more people thought that way, which might be another explanation for possible skew in the odds (apart from the massive money flow to mcGregor). Seems risky to short the huge underdog. Was it a smart bet? I'm not 100% convinced. But it was fun :) .

Usually odds aren't that easily exploitable, the system is pretty efficient, just like the stock market. I assume you have received a free bet where your initial stake is not returned? In that case, the best strategy is to bet on a big underdog somewhere & hope to get lucky. I.e.: payout 1.2x, implied odds 83%, bet $25 you win $5 83% of the time, expected payout: $4.17 payout 2x, implied odds 50%, bet $25 you win $25 50% of the time, expected payout: $12.50. payout 10x, implied odds 10%, bet $25 you win $225 10% of the time, expected payout: $22.50. That is, assuming the odds are fair. You can lock in your profits by laying the same bet on a betting exchange, google 'matched betting'. Oddsmonkey had a nice tool to show you what bets on a particular site were the best cash in your free bets but you probably have to have a paid account for that. Maybe there are some free alternatives. Betting action on this fight was crazy. Some interesting tidbits from an ESPN reporter: . Wouldn't surprise me if the odds on this were skewed but what do I know... Reportedly even Mayweather tried to bet on himself: http://www.espn.com/chalk/story/_/id/20472005/floyd-mayweather-tried-bet-fight-conor-mcgregor . Fun stuff. Saw a recap from the fight and looked like a smooth victory. Will put some food on the table for the next few weeks. Would be cool if some experienced/pro sports betters chime in, I'm sure there are a couple on this board. edit: or did you receive a bonus with rollover requirements?

Yeah, if you put in the work I'm sure you can find some decent bonuses. I saw Pokerstars gave you a $25 refund if Mayweather loses. Sites like oddsmonkey probably have dozens of other offers. Nice job on the side for the students among us. I'm too lazy for that, maxed out my credit card on Betfair.

This weekend Mayweather will be in the ring vs. McGregor. Mayweather should be a huge favorite afaik, yet McGregor is super popular and a lot of 'retail money' is flowing his way. Seems like a setup where the odds are potentially a bit skewed. Some bookies are reportedly having problems hedging their action, see for example: http://www.espn.com/chalk/story/_/id/20407149/gambling-how-floyd-mayweather-conor-mcgregor-fight-alarming-vegas-oddsmakers https://seekingalpha.com/news/3291838-vegas-bookmakers-exposed-mcgregor-upset I'm a total clown when it comes to boxing and this match has been all over the news, I don't have any special insights. But Mayweather is paying out 1.25x and that seems generous given the situation. Mayweather has a professional record of 49-0 and McGregor hasn't boxed a single match in his life (only MMA). I'm probably putting some money on the line, for fun and for profit. Given my lack of expertise I'm debating whether it should be a) a very insignificant amount or b) slightly more. Anybody else? Or am I falling for the sucker play?

Thanks. Put it on my e-reader for the upcoming vacation. Looking forward to reading it.

If anything, research suggests that women outperform on average. Men tend to be overconfident, they trade too much and put their savings in VRX or TSLA trying to hit it big. As for this forum, I couldn't care less. I try to judge ideas, not posters.

+1. When was the last true 'panic moment'? August 2015 right? I still remember that I wanted to buy some stuff around the opening but apart from IB all my brokerage accounts were inaccessible and/or unable to process orders. Complete disaster. Only IB was reliable (I use TWS fwiw). IB doesn't sell your market flow to others. Trading is usually crazy cheap and they allow access to a wide range of venues and order types. On the technical side they are just unbeatable. I personally think their reporting tools are excellent. I also love their corporate actions tool. With all other brokers I have to call / e-mail to get something done. Also, customer service might not hold your hand if you don't understand something but the ticket system works fine and they are far more knowledgeable about, for example, corporate actions, collateral, international withholding taxes and other 'advanced' subjects than all other brokers I have ever used. But yeah, sometimes it is not really user-friendly unless you are an expert.

Yeah, the competing group of bidders include a $2B USD pharma company, they should be able to finance this deal. Whether the SVA board allows them to do so is a different question .. I was lucky enough to buy some shares the past few days around $6.35 as I thought it was an attractive deal even without the second bid. Still looks attractive even if you assign only a small chance to the $8 bid succeeding.

More SVA. Might write a little bit about it later. Chinese going private at a ~5% discount to $7 offer, third party offering $8.

Yeah, sounds like you can write a book. Or some articles for a weblog / magazine. You have some interesting stuff to tell. Also, is this your second, anonymous account on this forum? Or are you a long-time poster already.

Yeah, cool thread. Any great stories about excessive partying with brokers / clients? Or were you purely on the quant-side? Actually, did your firms use brokers and if so, what did you think of them? Or was everything marketed directly by inhouse people and if so, any stories about them?

Any thoughts on the dividend in specie? Have been a bit lazy with this name but always looked interesting.

On the Hong Kong Exchange website you can search for shareholding disclosures. Theres' probably a better way but I haven't found it so far. Webb's holdings: http://sdinotice.hkex.com.hk/di/NSSrchPersonList.aspx?sa1=pl&scsd=18/05/2016&sced=18/05/2017&pn=webb&src=MAIN&lang=EN I own Ming Fai. Allan International also looks cheap. Not sure what he sees in the other stocks. The guy is a legend. From wikipedia:

::) You are right, that was a cheap shot. I updated my list.

In finance i'd say (in no particular order): - work ethic - having no conscience. - charisma. - being able to drink a lot. - loving strip clubs.

Interesting, would you mind opening a topic about it or sharing your insights? I've looked at it, spread looks juicy and I am skeptical a $3b takeover of a outdoor sports retailer would be blocked by regulators. Surely Wal-mart, Amazon and local shops sell way more guns, tents and fishing rods than Cabela's and Bass Pro combined? Doesn't seem like a big deal to to me. But I'm a gun shy European, no clue of outdoor sports market dynamics and I'm always a bit wary of regulators (unpredictable) so I haven't pulled the trigger yet. Also, RAD / WBA and ODP / SPLS have been intensely scrutinized so I'm not very confident regarding regulators thinking this deal will be fine.

The ex-minister of finance from Greece has written a book about his 'adventures' as a politician. Varoufakis describes himself as a completely rational, reasonable outsider who tries to fight for his country (between the lines I get the impression that he's actually quite stubborn and hard to work with). Nevertheless a smart guy thinking outside of the box. The workings of the EU, the IMF and the ECB are a bit depressing. Everybody has different incentives and the end result is that, while individual actors are often quite nice and reasonable, the machinery crushes Greece. Entertaining read, a bit dense at times. Review from the Guardian: link. Few interesting points: Varoufakis is harsh about most politicians but quite enthousiast about Macron. He also mentioned his (extremely negative) views of OPAP. Don't discard the book because he's supposedly a left-wing extremist. His economical views are actually quite nuanced.

The part about the swimming pool was awesome. Great kid. I agree that they should've sticked to the biography only.