IT, it's not so easy to lose money as it may seem. V
When you bought a stock say at $50, you have only 2 ways to lose money: either you sell the stock for less, or the price of this stock will never go hight enough to bring back your $50 plus a certain interest plus your commissions. That is not a probable exspection with Intel, Dell, Microsoft for a couple of years.
So, I think, what we CAN lose is a more complicated discussion:
Question is, is that, what we did, the most successful way to invest these 50 bucks. Simple minds tend to compare with simple proceedings like "investing in bonds", "holding index-options" or "buying a home".
Obviously we must consider more than just one period (month, year, whatever). I feel the most important factor is time - exactly, the amount of time we are comfortable (like Berney would say) with. This kind of comfort may be achieved for Bob (in his former function of daytrader) in a region of hours, for me (as leap-trader) in a region of 1-2 years. So far I understoud, Janko tends to again far longer investments.
What remains to do is statistic. We can estimate a normal-distribution (don't know if this is the correct English term for "Gauss") of trades from highly successful till absolute bullshit, and when a recalculation results in the region of reality, we was quite honest against us.
It's allowed to add a personal sight? We shouldn't forget the amount of time we've got. I'm nearly 48 - my father died when he was 41. Maybe my next plane will be targeted by a CIA-missile or my next taxidriver jets his A-Class around a tree. Wir wissen nicht, wem die Stunde schl„gt.
All these mistakes we're crying about are - so far we can see - not "loss", but only not optimal buys. And again, even it's boring, we need more PAINTIENCE.
I decided just now for me not to take a A-CLASS-taxi till naz has a 2xxx-figure. Pees, freadum and heapynas. Jury |
