Jump to content

16yr old emerging fund manager


LowIQinvestor
 Share

Recommended Posts

What are the people in the media bragging about her,... a new teenage Hollywood wonder girl,... somehow just listening to her for only 2 minutes give me the goose-bumps. Sorry,... but if I hear the word "trade", trading on instincts, on trade on technicals,... my mind freak's out the opposite direction,.. like a torero's red rag to a bull,... my mind would slap them Bruce Willis'like in the face, feeling I have the most stupidest person in the world in front of me,... grrr. I bet if you asked her about deeper fundamental accounting and legal terms, beneath BV, IV, PTPP, she has no clue. How many silly school children think they can have such an edge in the market. No one at the top of the Forbes billionaire list has become rich through day trading, Lampert & Berkowitz (not a member) have gone through investing with intensive "stalking the facts" of the fundamentals, having their assistant's go through piles of paperwork, public filings, legacy issues of legal perspectives. And there comes such a weird actress thinking she might be smarter than Buffett, Munger or mathematician Jim Simons. She is not even in the league of smartie Danika McKellar. But what do I know....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest wellmont

tiffany's was "over bought"...."I am shorting Anadarko it seems over sold"....

 

it does not look like she's working much as an actress and she is hawking a web site.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are the people in the media bragging about her,... a new teenage Hollywood wonder girl,... somehow just listening to her for only 2 minutes give me the goose-bumps. Sorry,... but if I hear the word "trade", trading on instincts, on trade on technicals,... my mind freak's out the opposite direction,.. like a torero's red rag to a bull,... my mind would slap them Bruce Willis'like in the face, feeling I have the most stupidest person in the world in front of me,... grrr. I bet if you asked her about deeper fundamental accounting and legal terms, beneath BV, IV, PTPP, she has no clue. How many silly school children think they can have such an edge in the market. No one at the top of the Forbes billionaire list has become rich through day trading, Lampert & Berkowitz (not a member) have gone through investing with intensive "stalking the facts" of the fundamentals, having their assistant's go through piles of paperwork, public filings, legacy issues of legal perspectives. And there comes such a weird actress thinking she might be smarter than Buffett, Munger or mathematician Jim Simons. She is not even in the league of smartie Danika McKellar. But what do I know....

 

Newsflash, how many value investors at the top of the Forbes 500 list too?  Some will claim Buffett, but I'd argue he got there by building a business not pure investing.

 

I think this sort of video is infuriating to investors on this board because most put in so much work for returns far less then her.  I don't get the technical stuff, but if it really is as easy to watch squiggles and make money for some people why learn any more?  It's not like knowing depreciation schedules or pension accounting is helpful in getting a significant other.  Can you imagine someone saying "Once I brought up LIFO at dinner she said I was the one…"

 

I invest this way because it makes sense to me, not because it's the best.  I think there are far better and quicker ways to make money, unfortunately that's not what comes natural to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are the people in the media bragging about her,... a new teenage Hollywood wonder girl,... somehow just listening to her for only 2 minutes give me the goose-bumps. Sorry,... but if I hear the word "trade", trading on instincts, on trade on technicals,... my mind freak's out the opposite direction,.. like a torero's red rag to a bull,... my mind would slap them Bruce Willis'like in the face, feeling I have the most stupidest person in the world in front of me,... grrr. I bet if you asked her about deeper fundamental accounting and legal terms, beneath BV, IV, PTPP, she has no clue. How many silly school children think they can have such an edge in the market. No one at the top of the Forbes billionaire list has become rich through day trading, Lampert & Berkowitz (not a member) have gone through investing with intensive "stalking the facts" of the fundamentals, having their assistant's go through piles of paperwork, public filings, legacy issues of legal perspectives. And there comes such a weird actress thinking she might be smarter than Buffett, Munger or mathematician Jim Simons. She is not even in the league of smartie Danika McKellar. But what do I know....

 

Newsflash, how many value investors at the top of the Forbes 500 list too?  Some will claim Buffett, but I'd argue he got there by building a business not pure investing.

 

I think this sort of video is infuriating to investors on this board because most put in so much work for returns far less then her.  I don't get the technical stuff, but if it really is as easy to watch squiggles and make money for some people why learn any more?  It's not like knowing depreciation schedules or pension accounting is helpful in getting a significant other.  Can you imagine someone saying "Once I brought up LIFO at dinner she said I was the one…"

 

I invest this way because it makes sense to me, not because it's the best.  I think there are far better and quicker ways to make money, unfortunately that's not what comes natural to me.

 

What she is doing is not investing, and I think it's a bit presumptuous to assume the board members here aren't earning adequate returns. Even if it did work, her style is inferior because of frictional costs from trading (short term capital gains and commissions) and day trading has a proven track record of being a loser over time. Value investing - at least some forms of it - has been proven to outperform the market over time.

 

I would suggest that this girl will not have any substantial winners so long as she keeps this style - she wouldn't have held AAPL, GGP in bankruptcy, BAC recently, AIG, etc. long enough to benefit from the lion's share of their returns. In the case of GGP, I doubt she'd even be able to analyze it properly because of a lack of understanding of corporate bankruptcy law. That being the case, she wouldn't have been able to generate the multi-hundred or thousand percent returns that at least a few people here did.

 

I also don't think most people here find her infuriating so much as amusing, or they may - as I do - feel bad for her and the inevitable sorrow that will come from her strategy.

 

Your comment about significant others is odd. Can you explain what you mean by that to me, or the relevance of it to the discussion? Most people who are interested in such things would probably be better off if they weren't, though that seems irrelevant to the topic in general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are the people in the media bragging about her,... a new teenage Hollywood wonder girl,... somehow just listening to her for only 2 minutes give me the goose-bumps. Sorry,... but if I hear the word "trade", trading on instincts, on trade on technicals,... my mind freak's out the opposite direction,.. like a torero's red rag to a bull,... my mind would slap them Bruce Willis'like in the face, feeling I have the most stupidest person in the world in front of me,... grrr. I bet if you asked her about deeper fundamental accounting and legal terms, beneath BV, IV, PTPP, she has no clue. How many silly school children think they can have such an edge in the market. No one at the top of the Forbes billionaire list has become rich through day trading, Lampert & Berkowitz (not a member) have gone through investing with intensive "stalking the facts" of the fundamentals, having their assistant's go through piles of paperwork, public filings, legacy issues of legal perspectives. And there comes such a weird actress thinking she might be smarter than Buffett, Munger or mathematician Jim Simons. She is not even in the league of smartie Danika McKellar. But what do I know....

 

Newsflash, how many value investors at the top of the Forbes 500 list too?  Some will claim Buffett, but I'd argue he got there by building a business not pure investing.

 

I think this sort of video is infuriating to investors on this board because most put in so much work for returns far less then her.  I don't get the technical stuff, but if it really is as easy to watch squiggles and make money for some people why learn any more?  It's not like knowing depreciation schedules or pension accounting is helpful in getting a significant other.  Can you imagine someone saying "Once I brought up LIFO at dinner she said I was the one…"

 

I invest this way because it makes sense to me, not because it's the best.  I think there are far better and quicker ways to make money, unfortunately that's not what comes natural to me.

 

What she is doing is not investing, and I think it's a bit presumptuous to assume the board members here aren't earning adequate returns. Even if it did work, her style is inferior because of frictional costs from trading (short term capital gains and commissions) and day trading has a proven track record of being a loser over time. Value investing - at least some forms of it - has been proven to outperform the market over time.

 

I would suggest that this girl will not have any substantial winners so long as she keeps this style - she wouldn't have held AAPL, GGP in bankruptcy, BAC recently, AIG, etc. long enough to benefit from the lion's share of their returns. In the case of GGP, I doubt she'd even be able to analyze it properly because of a lack of understanding of corporate bankruptcy law. That being the case, she wouldn't have been able to generate the multi-hundred or thousand percent returns that at least a few people here did.

 

I also don't think most people here find her infuriating so much as amusing, or they may - as I do - feel bad for her and the inevitable sorrow that will come from her strategy.

 

Your comment about significant others is odd. Can you explain what you mean by that to me, or the relevance of it to the discussion? Most people who are interested in such things would probably be better off if they weren't, though that seems irrelevant to the topic in general.

 

Good comments Scott.  To your last question, I read a sense of superiority into some of the other posts, like value investing is the noble way to invest, and there's some sense of pride to it.  Sometimes when I read these posts I get this feeling that there are some on the board who feel that since they're a Buffett groupie they'll get girls, just like guys in high school think if they play guitar they'll get girls.

 

I would argue she is investing as people use the term today.  How many times have you heard someone talk about how a certain crib is an "investment" or their TV was a "great investment".  Investing is an ambiguous term nowadays, so I'm not surprised to see it in the context of a day trader.

 

I agree most traders wash out, but there are a non-significant amount of people who have made money investing with technicals.  Technicals work because there are so many people using them, it's a self fulfilling thing, heck a lot of value investors use technicals in addition to fundamental research, Michael Burry comes to mind in that regard.

 

I'm not a value investor because of research or it's proven.  If someone told me value investing wouldn't out perform I'd still probably invest this way.  The reason is to me it seems like the only prudent way to manage capital.  Buy something for less than it's worth and sell it when it becomes overpriced, focus on not losing money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are the people in the media bragging about her,... a new teenage Hollywood wonder girl,... somehow just listening to her for only 2 minutes give me the goose-bumps. Sorry,... but if I hear the word "trade", trading on instincts, on trade on technicals,... my mind freak's out the opposite direction,.. like a torero's red rag to a bull,... my mind would slap them Bruce Willis'like in the face, feeling I have the most stupidest person in the world in front of me,... grrr. I bet if you asked her about deeper fundamental accounting and legal terms, beneath BV, IV, PTPP, she has no clue. How many silly school children think they can have such an edge in the market. No one at the top of the Forbes billionaire list has become rich through day trading, Lampert & Berkowitz (not a member) have gone through investing with intensive "stalking the facts" of the fundamentals, having their assistant's go through piles of paperwork, public filings, legacy issues of legal perspectives. And there comes such a weird actress thinking she might be smarter than Buffett, Munger or mathematician Jim Simons. She is not even in the league of smartie Danika McKellar. But what do I know....

 

Newsflash, how many value investors at the top of the Forbes 500 list too?  Some will claim Buffett, but I'd argue he got there by building a business not pure investing.

 

I think this sort of video is infuriating to investors on this board because most put in so much work for returns far less then her.  I don't get the technical stuff, but if it really is as easy to watch squiggles and make money for some people why learn any more?  It's not like knowing depreciation schedules or pension accounting is helpful in getting a significant other.  Can you imagine someone saying "Once I brought up LIFO at dinner she said I was the one"

 

I invest this way because it makes sense to me, not because it's the best.  I think there are far better and quicker ways to make money, unfortunately that's not what comes natural to me.

 

I completely agree.  You have to do what matches your personality and what you are comfortable with.  I've seen people make some ridiculous investments based on what I thought and they turned out to be wildly successful, sometimes that's how the dice rolls.  I'd compare value investing to walking into a casino and counting cards, it takes time, patience and a lot of skill.  Doesn't mean the guy at the craps table or roulette won't hit big. 

 

After graduating from college in '06 I had a group of friends that went to work at Rackspace and they went balls to the walls in their 401k every paycheck, every quarter for 5 years...meanwhile I was the analyst working on credit packages to lend to Rackspace...at no point in that timeframe did RAX look cheap...and they had no clue on valuation/cash flow, etc...and I'm glad none of them took my advice...they live a very comfortable life right now.  Is that infuriating? no, because they are good friends and I wish them nothing but the best, but it does tick me off at times.

 

Technical analysis does work under the right circumstances and if you follow the rules (take losses quickly, manage trades)...actually there's a lot to admire about a system that is very rules focused and takes emotions out (not all).  You're not going to make an absolute killing like Eric and the BAC trade because most of the TA folks focus on a very short term mindset, a 10-15% breakout in a 2 week period with 2-3 day consolidation is a successful trade...and then they scan 100's of charts for the next setup...most people here don't like it because it's not mentally stimulating and it's not their stroke. That's fine, buying a stock is not like religion where if you don't do it right (trading, technical analysis, small cap growth, gold, etc)  you go to hell and if you do it right (value investing the Warren Buffett way) you go to heaven.  Insider trading is a different story and I hope Steven Cohen gets what he deserves :)

 

WB did technical analysis, Berkowitz did too...I'm assuming at some point their personalities led them to another direction and they grew up...that's what people do.  I started investing in '99 and the first stock I bought was Egghead.com...if Rachael is smart, which she clearly is having graduated hs at 16 and started investing at an early age, at some point she will grow up.  Best of luck to her.

 

Value investing makes sense to me because it matches my personality and I enjoy the discussions on this board.  I couldn't imagine being on a board that posted charts and discussed moving averages, bollinger bands and aroon indicators. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are the people in the media bragging about her,... a new teenage Hollywood wonder girl,... somehow just listening to her for only 2 minutes give me the goose-bumps. Sorry,... but if I hear the word "trade", trading on instincts, on trade on technicals,... my mind freak's out the opposite direction,.. like a torero's red rag to a bull,... my mind would slap them Bruce Willis'like in the face, feeling I have the most stupidest person in the world in front of me,... grrr. I bet if you asked her about deeper fundamental accounting and legal terms, beneath BV, IV, PTPP, she has no clue. How many silly school children think they can have such an edge in the market. No one at the top of the Forbes billionaire list has become rich through day trading, Lampert & Berkowitz (not a member) have gone through investing with intensive "stalking the facts" of the fundamentals, having their assistant's go through piles of paperwork, public filings, legacy issues of legal perspectives. And there comes such a weird actress thinking she might be smarter than Buffett, Munger or mathematician Jim Simons. She is not even in the league of smartie Danika McKellar. But what do I know....

 

Newsflash, how many value investors at the top of the Forbes 500 list too?  Some will claim Buffett, but I'd argue he got there by building a business not pure investing.

 

I think this sort of video is infuriating to investors on this board because most put in so much work for returns far less then her.  I don't get the technical stuff, but if it really is as easy to watch squiggles and make money for some people why learn any more?  It's not like knowing depreciation schedules or pension accounting is helpful in getting a significant other.  Can you imagine someone saying "Once I brought up LIFO at dinner she said I was the one…"

 

I invest this way because it makes sense to me, not because it's the best.  I think there are far better and quicker ways to make money, unfortunately that's not what comes natural to me.

 

What she is doing is not investing, and I think it's a bit presumptuous to assume the board members here aren't earning adequate returns. Even if it did work, her style is inferior because of frictional costs from trading (short term capital gains and commissions) and day trading has a proven track record of being a loser over time. Value investing - at least some forms of it - has been proven to outperform the market over time.

 

I would suggest that this girl will not have any substantial winners so long as she keeps this style - she wouldn't have held AAPL, GGP in bankruptcy, BAC recently, AIG, etc. long enough to benefit from the lion's share of their returns. In the case of GGP, I doubt she'd even be able to analyze it properly because of a lack of understanding of corporate bankruptcy law. That being the case, she wouldn't have been able to generate the multi-hundred or thousand percent returns that at least a few people here did.

 

I also don't think most people here find her infuriating so much as amusing, or they may - as I do - feel bad for her and the inevitable sorrow that will come from her strategy.

 

Your comment about significant others is odd. Can you explain what you mean by that to me, or the relevance of it to the discussion? Most people who are interested in such things would probably be better off if they weren't, though that seems irrelevant to the topic in general.

 

Sometimes when I read these posts I get this feeling that there are some on the board who feel that since they're a Buffett groupie they'll get girls, just like guys in high school think if they play guitar they'll get girls.

 

 

I couldn't play guitar in high school either! Ugh...why am I wasting my time with all this then????  :'(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you guys are probably giving her a bit too much credit. As far as I'm aware, there are no large studies on the performance of U.S. based day traders, but Brad Barber at U.C. Davis has found that day traders in Taiwan do absolutely terribly. Fewer than 1% of them consistently (over a period of years) do well.

 

If anyone knows of U.S.-based research I'd be glad to read it. My best guess is that the girl in the video won't do very well over time if she keeps doing what she's done to date. I hope that I am wrong and she does fantastically, but I don't think that'd be the smart bet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you guys are probably giving her a bit too much credit. As far as I'm aware, there are no large studies on the performance of U.S. based day traders, but Brad Barber at U.C. Davis has found that day traders in Taiwan do absolutely terribly. Fewer than 1% of them consistently (over a period of years) do well.

 

If anyone knows of U.S.-based research I'd be glad to read it. My best guess is that the girl in the video won't do very well over time if she keeps doing what she's done to date. I hope that I am wrong and she does fantastically, but I don't think that'd be the smart bet.

 

Terrance Odean & Brad Barber at U.C.Davis wrote a research paper some years ago called

 

"Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth: The Common Stock Investment Performance of Individual Investors"

http://faculty.haas.berkeley.edu/odean/Papers%20current%20versions/Individual_Investor_Performance_Final.pdf

 

 

http://faculty.haas.berkeley.edu/odean/

http://gsm.ucdavis.edu/faculty/brad-m-barber

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good comments Scott.  To your last question, I read a sense of superiority into some of the other posts, like value investing is the noble way to invest, and there's some sense of pride to it.  Sometimes when I read these posts I get this feeling that there are some on the board who feel that since they're a Buffett groupie they'll get girls, just like guys in high school think if they play guitar they'll get girls.

 

I would argue she is investing as people use the term today.  How many times have you heard someone talk about how a certain crib is an "investment" or their TV was a "great investment".  Investing is an ambiguous term nowadays, so I'm not surprised to see it in the context of a day trader.

 

I agree most traders wash out, but there are a non-significant amount of people who have made money investing with technicals.  Technicals work because there are so many people using them, it's a self fulfilling thing, heck a lot of value investors use technicals in addition to fundamental research, Michael Burry comes to mind in that regard.

 

I'm not a value investor because of research or it's proven.  If someone told me value investing wouldn't out perform I'd still probably invest this way.  The reason is to me it seems like the only prudent way to manage capital.  Buy something for less than it's worth and sell it when it becomes overpriced, focus on not losing money.

 

I couldn't agree with Oddball's comments on this thread more.  Let's face it, it's not just value investors, but that happens to be where we are at the moment.  Many people who do a certain thing want to feel that what they do is superior to the alternatives.  It's like in high school.  "Your" group was always better than the jocks, the popular crowd, etc (making the assumption of course that most people on a value investing board were likely not in the jocks or popular crowd).  Everyone sits around the cafeteria at their table whispering about the other tables.  It makes you feel special.

 

At the end of the day who gives a crap how anyone invests.  I invest the way I do, like Oddball said, because it makes sense to me.  It's a part of me.  I couldn't do it another way if I tried.  People seem to take great offense though at someone who is a technical trader.  She'll either burn out or she won't.  But last I checked the name of the game wasn't investing as an art form, it was making money, pure and simple.  There are many ways to get to investing heaven.

 

As a related matter, I do agree though that separate and apart from "trading", when people are touting a 16 year old "guru" that is a bad sign for where the market is!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a related matter, I do agree though that separate and apart from "trading", when people are touting a 16 year old "guru" that is a bad sign for where the market is!

 

I wanted to say this, too.  It looks like there's plenty of runway left on this bull market.  You know the dumb money is starting to flow when a teenage day trader gets a 10 minute segment to discuss her strategies ("buy when you like it, sell when you don't").  I remember reading a lot of BS like this in the late 90s.  This is just the beginning; we're going to be delighted by tons of shallow wisdom over the next couple years.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are the people in the media bragging about her,... a new teenage Hollywood wonder girl,... somehow just listening to her for only 2 minutes give me the goose-bumps. Sorry,... but if I hear the word "trade", trading on instincts, on trade on technicals,... my mind freak's out the opposite direction,.. like a torero's red rag to a bull,... my mind would slap them Bruce Willis'like in the face, feeling I have the most stupidest person in the world in front of me,... grrr. I bet if you asked her about deeper fundamental accounting and legal terms, beneath BV, IV, PTPP, she has no clue. How many silly school children think they can have such an edge in the market. No one at the top of the Forbes billionaire list has become rich through day trading, Lampert & Berkowitz (not a member) have gone through investing with intensive "stalking the facts" of the fundamentals, having their assistant's go through piles of paperwork, public filings, legacy issues of legal perspectives. And there comes such a weird actress thinking she might be smarter than Buffett, Munger or mathematician Jim Simons. She is not even in the league of smartie Danika McKellar. But what do I know....

 

Newsflash, how many value investors at the top of the Forbes 500 list too?  Some will claim Buffett, but I'd argue he got there by building a business not pure investing.

 

I think this sort of video is infuriating to investors on this board because most put in so much work for returns far less then her.  I don't get the technical stuff, but if it really is as easy to watch squiggles and make money for some people why learn any more?  It's not like knowing depreciation schedules or pension accounting is helpful in getting a significant other.  Can you imagine someone saying "Once I brought up LIFO at dinner she said I was the one…"

 

I invest this way because it makes sense to me, not because it's the best.  I think there are far better and quicker ways to make money, unfortunately that's not what comes natural to me.

 

I think value investing is a misnomer. What most of us on this board do is "opportunistic investing". And over the long-term, I have confidence that good opportunistic investors (which I would argue is exactly what most of the wealthiest people on the planet do) significantly outperform everyone else.

 

No one is infuriated by this girl. I think most people here would probably be infuriated that the notion her newfound success somehow even slightly threatens what we do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Newsflash, how many value investors at the top of the Forbes 500 list too?  Some will claim Buffett, but I'd argue he got there by building a business not pure investing.

 

I think this sort of video is infuriating to investors on this board because most put in so much work for returns far less then her.  I don't get the technical stuff, but if it really is as easy to watch squiggles and make money for some people why learn any more?  It's not like knowing depreciation schedules or pension accounting is helpful in getting a significant other.  Can you imagine someone saying "Once I brought up LIFO at dinner she said I was the one…"

 

I invest this way because it makes sense to me, not because it's the best.  I think there are far better and quicker ways to make money, unfortunately that's not what comes natural to me.

 

I used to date a girl who would get turned on by finance talk. She herself was in finance, but knew little about investing. But she could listen to me all day and it would be sexy for her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...