Guest ValueCarl Posted August 28, 2010 Posted August 28, 2010 Remember Mr. MGOO's INSIDE SCOOP! "This is NOT your father's STOCK MARKET!" imo In conclusion, continuing advances in computerized trading pose challenges for regulators throughout the world—and leave individual investors marginalized. Regulators will have to take into account the ability of high- frequency traders to play global regulatory arbitrage in microseconds. Regulators should not only seek to assure that markets are able to continue to function under stress, but they also need to devise remedial actions that protect individual investors who have fundamentally different objectives from the high-turnover objectives of high- frequency traders and computerized algorithms. https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.international-economy.com/TIE_Su10_MalmgrenStys.pdf
Guest ValueCarl Posted August 28, 2010 Posted August 28, 2010 I have a significantly better suggestion, having proposed it for many years x many different venues. Shut all the quote systems down except for buyer and sellers to meet on a quarterly basis, after a financial report has been filed, and a "VALUE ARBITRATOR" pegs prices according to a "DEFINED" set of "RULES" resulting from said reports. That "Arbitrator" or "Ombudsman" should stem from the "Accounting Industry." Think of ALL the CRIMINAL OPERATORS society could rid themselves of from WRONG STREET and its ugly tentacles, should such a system be adopted. Some of those scoundrels might be forced to finally go and do something PRODUCTIVE with their useless lives of cheating, stealing and lying! Who would benefit from such a system except for those "investors" with "longer time horizons" willing to hold their shares until business prospects meet their stated goals, or impatience PERSISTS and they sell at LESS than DESIRED PRICES! Of course, part of the ground rules for any "investor" would be that, no buying or selling except on a "FIXED DAY" based upon quarterly results relative to "FIXED PRICES" after "RESULTS" are KNOWN! In my system, the "accounting firms" would derive the "fees" for arranging that buyers and sellers meet on each day of "RECKONING." What a nice dream for bringing breaths of fresh air to such a criminal, manipulated system of "Liars Poker." imo Some commentators have suggested introduction of minimum holding periods for non–broker-dealers. Alteration of incen- tives might be achieved by introduction of a sliding scale of fees or taxes according to volume and speed of trading.
Guest ValueCarl Posted August 28, 2010 Posted August 28, 2010 Technology may now have overridden such investment concepts. High-frequency trading platforms are focused solely on ramping up speed and volume so as to maximize tiny gains per transaction. Computerized algorithms that are momentum-sensitive are increasingly high-frequency trad- ing-driven, raising serious doubts about traditional concepts of how markets should work. Investment strategies based on fundamentals such as a company’s long-term perfor- mance have been swept aside by high-frequency trading algorithms hunting for inefficiencies in daily pricing and super arbitrage opportunities. In so doing, they open investors to a new form of risk that has not been accounted for in most “buy and hold” asset allocation models. In effect, individual traders are confronted with over- whelming momentum-driven forces that are unrelated to performance of individual businesses. A “fair price” may exist, but high-frequency traders are not seeking fair prices—they are focused solely on immediate profit. They are seeking transaction volume boosted by any form of momentum they can generate. Unfortunately, high- frequency trader interaction with computerized algorithms of large-cap financial institutions is providing opportunities for high-speed, virtually undetectable market manipulation. Where there is opportunity to “shape” the market for advan- tage, it is likely that such opportunity will be exploited.
mountboney Posted August 28, 2010 Posted August 28, 2010 What's the big deal. If Mr. Market on steroids is even more irrational then so much the better.
Guest ValueCarl Posted August 29, 2010 Posted August 29, 2010 If you believe trading against a computer being programmed by, let's say, Goldman Sachs, is no "big deal" all while supply/demand factors are ignored, and when computers go WRY in cases of "FLASH CRASHES", with more spectacular irrational prices being "ELIMINATED," keep having a go at such a "FIXED GAME." "FREE MARKETS" have been denigrated to where my musical fruit originates from! Assuming one did enact something along the lines of my suggestion(quarterly pegging for buyers and sellers to meet), the market would be significantly more "EFFICIENT." Then, those economics professors X the land would gain more respect from men like Buffett, Watsa, etal. I would venture to say that if markets operated more along those lines, someone like Warren E. Buffett would never have been heard about. I would also speculate that he might be a great proponent of something like this today, after CLEANING HOUSE from IMBECILES as well as CRIMINALS for so many decades.
Guest HarryLong Posted September 3, 2010 Posted September 3, 2010 If you believe trading against a computer being programmed by, let's say, Goldman Sachs, is no "big deal" all while supply/demand factors are ignored, and when computers go WRY in cases of "FLASH CRASHES", with more spectacular irrational prices being "ELIMINATED," keep having a go at such a "FIXED GAME." "FREE MARKETS" have been denigrated to where my musical fruit originates from! Assuming one did enact something along the lines of my suggestion(quarterly pegging for buyers and sellers to meet), the market would be significantly more "EFFICIENT." Then, those economics professors X the land would gain more respect from men like Buffett, Watsa, etal. I would venture to say that if markets operated more along those lines, someone like Warren E. Buffett would never have been heard about. I would also speculate that he might be a great proponent of something like this today, after CLEANING HOUSE from IMBECILES as well as CRIMINALS for so many decades. "Quarterly pegging" ?! Someone needs to say it, you're off the deep end. Once you say something like suggesting quarterly pegging, no one can take you seriously. You're just going from one extreme to the other.
Guest HarryLong Posted September 3, 2010 Posted September 3, 2010 "a "VALUE ARBITRATOR" pegs prices according to a "DEFINED" set of "RULES" resulting from said reports. " Your "reasoning" is just so facile. Of course, it would never occur to you that much a business's value arises from cash flows it may or may not earn in the future. Much of Buffett's work goes into making such estimates. You're not going to mechanically be able to peg a value from a set of rules applied to financial reports. If you believe that, you're a simpleton. And stop whining so much. It's becoming an infectious activity to a few people on this board. But I state the obvious, and perhaps, waste my breath on you.
Guest HarryLong Posted September 3, 2010 Posted September 3, 2010 PVD just hit a new 52 week high today. It has a very low price/free cash flow ratio, a low P/E ratio, a strong competitive position, and a good dividend. Oh, I am being so marginalized! Woe unto me?! Why are the computers letting me make so much money?! ;) Someone needs to lighten you up. Stop whining, do some research, and get to work. Find something good and cheap that no one has ever heard of.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now