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 : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: shades who wrote (62506)	4/22/2005 6:12:02 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

<At the high end however - not everyone is using the latest chessmaster program to compete against each other - so if me and you have chessmaster 10 - and they are playing with thier 1 day of experience reading a beginners chess book - I am betting on me and you to win the money - CNBC has done the work for us - spreading all those feel good memes to the sheeple with cash - why fight it?> That's a good theory, but remember that the top lot get a disproportionate share. Imagine how many $10,000 investors have lost their money to make Berkshire Hathaway's umpty $billions. That would be about 10 million small investors, though plenty of Berkshire Hathaway's assets have come from retained earnings, not just from counter-party losses. There are plenty of other big speculative winners. It's not like playing red/black at the casino, being a 50:50 zero sum game with a bid/ask spread brokers fee to the house. In the speculative realm in shares, there can easily be 100 losers and 1 winner after a few years of reading the MacD head and shoulders, cup and handle, stochastic moving average tea leaves. Mqurice