Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Rande Is . . . HOME -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Qone0 who wrote (49144)	3/14/2001 10:10:31 PM
From: Tradelite	Respond to of 57584

Robert Warren....see my edited post right before yours. LOL! We agree! Time spent holding an asset usually translates into "earning" a return on the investment, but until the market gives it back, money vanishes. This earning period can be one day or ten years.

To: Qone0 who wrote (49144)	3/15/2001 12:09:12 AM
From: velociraptor_	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 57584

I agree Robert and this is an element which I failed to add in a sufficient way. It does work on the upside as well but this is where volume makes the distinction. Notice in the charts how it took a lot of volume to take the shares up both only partial volume to take them back down to the same level. Thus, the rest of the volume is still holding at higher prices and yet the price is back to where it started. It's like if I had a stock which I bought at $10 and sold 1 share to 1000 people for $12 each due to increased demand. Now imagine the demand diminishes and sell pressure increases. I could buy back 500 of those shares at only $6 a piece because that is all I am willing to pay and the seller agrees because there are no other buyers. 500 people still hold their shares at the inflated prices, yet they are now only selling for half price. If the other 500 sell as well it inceases the sell pressure even more and continues to drop the price. This is what we are seeing and ultimately results in the destruction of wealth faster than it was created.

To: Qone0 who wrote (49144)	3/15/2001 12:41:19 AM
From: The Flying Crane	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 57584

Very interesting discussion on the subject of disappearing wealth... here is another angle of looking .... >>"Wealth has just been created out of thin air. Just like it was lost out of thin air the day before."<< The way I see it, it is the illusion of wealth that disappeared. Simply because of demand and supply, the wealth of every stockholder of XYZ when XYZ was trading at $300.00 was only as good as the stockholders could manage to sell it at $300.00 before other stockholders did the same. It was very easy to sit back and appreciated one's wealth when the stock was trading at $300.00; but if you were holding 50 times more shares than those who were willing to take it off your hands for $300.00, you only had an illusion of wealth based on the price of $300.00. The only real wealth are those who sold their shares during the run up to $300.00. Thus, those who started taking profit by selling their shares from $200.00 all the way to $300.00 are the one with real wealth as opposed to those who were still holding their shares while the price was $300.00. Sure, the investor/trader who sold all his/her shares from $200 to $300 might miss the run-up to $500.00; but that creation of wealth based on the price of $500.00 was still illusional as best. Thus, it is those who could control their greed and always sold too early that get to keep their real wealth. A trailing stop is one of a good way to transform your illusional wealth into real wealth. Of course, all of the above is simply "law of demand and supply" painted in different color....