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.

Politics : Gold and Silver Stocks and Related Commentary -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: IOTA who wrote (6765)	2/17/2005 9:16:45 PM
From: koan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 18308

The percentage question-lol: hope I am right: oldbird, I posted this on stockhouse. If I am wrong I really will have egg on my face-lol. Oldbird I think you are making the same mistake Issac Newton made and corrected by Einstein with his theory of relativity-lol. Now lest you be insulted, I beleive Newton was probably smarter than Einstein, so there is no need for taking offense-lol. On the surface one would think % is correct, but you cannot consider wts in a vacuum-lol. Wts are inextricable linked to the stock just as space is inextrically related to time-lol. so the wts have to be valued in reltion to the stock as well as the wt. For example, lets take todays action and go back in time. Say you bought 1 share and 1 wt today at the close i.e .70 and .27. Now lets assume tomorrow the stock retraces exactly, then you would probably lose .05 if you bought the stock but only .035 if you bought the wt. One has to consider the percentage lose in the wt not in relation to the wt, but rather in relation to the total price of the wt and the stock-lol. So whereas percentage seems to be the criteria, it is not, because the wt always moves in relation to the stock, so the % has to be based on the stock and the wt in which case the wt would lose less than the stock in percentage terms. Cheers