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 : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gg cox who wrote (182162)	12/30/2021 10:10:36 PM
From: sense	1 Recommendation Recommended By maceng2 Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217574

I guess to the usual platitude "if it was easy, everyone would do it" you can add... "if they all made sense, it wouldn't be work sorting out those that do" ? I think often an error made by investors in thinking "money" is an agnostic quantity that actually sits on the sidelines of the markets looking for opportunity and seeking to apply free market principles in determining properly risked values to a gnats ass... to deploy itself optimally in enabling magic to happen with no risk while giving enormous returns. The money clearly thinks of itself that way, too, far too often... when the reality is... at least half of the people engaged in business at that level... are average or less in ability ? Many in the market mistake the number of zeros attached to a deal as an indicator of quality in its provenance... What I see instead, in practice... is often more the opposite... just as a NYSE listing isn't an assurance some high flying stock isn't a P & D... it just means that with enough zeros they can afford the lawyers to get away with whatever they want... and, wow, have I uncovered some stinkers over the years. Instead of zero's adding "quality", I pretty often see the "smart" money being about as dumb as they come... Wealth, for far too many, imposes its own brand of myopia, in part... and engenders a rejiggering of values that tends to personalize money... not different in business, often, than in media, politics, sports or entertainment where "making it"once in one thing might lead you to think better of yourself... in everything ? I'm sure a shrink could pin a name on that phenom... but, I'm drawing a blank... It ends up being more about ego than reason far too often... The VC crowd even memorialize that and tout it as a litmus test of their own superior understanding and prospective candidates (submission) as $ IQ... stated in the form of a question asked as: "What's more important, who you know, or what you know" ? And, of course... they're exactly wrong... even as Jeffrey Epstein might have smirkingly have told them... as what you know about who you know can matter far more than who you know ? Who you know... versus who you "know"... in the biblical sense ? It all still reduces to... humans being far too human after all... to even bother pretending to be all that... Precious few meaningfully overcome it. So, I'm not overly sure of the utility of the effort in trying to fathom it in specific instances... It is even true that in some situations the pairing of nothing but chutzpah and far too much money that lacks the good sense to know any better... can deliver brilliant successes...While the obvious, safe and easy no brainer play left in the hands of one those lacking that self confidence... for good reason... is actually the bigger risk. I demurred from investing in Tesla back in the day... having calculated "can't get there from here" as the most probable outcome. And, Elon, just this year... validated that I'd had it calculated just about exactly right... ? The risk tolerance is only a small part of it. Lots of people willing to take those risks with others money... versus the few who can maintain their focus and their wits to think through the problems ? I've also read prospectuses for high flying satellite telecom deals... and determined both... what you're doing, technically, won't work... but, the deal is structured so that you can't lose even if it fails... while I'm guaranteed to lose... even if it does work ? And, not wrong about that, either... the massive number of zero's involved and the mating of esoteric technical and market jargon not enough to carry the investors into orbit with it ? The steak to sizzle ratio... is still an issue that's real... because, as a trader, versus a buy and hold investor putting $ into ridiculous risks... you're betting against other investors being more willingly irrational than you're willing to be... so trading in tech stocks isn't wholly irrational... as long as you can manage to remain the lesser fool enough of the time ? Mining stocks no different... as the Lassonde curve proves... many more investors are willing to pay more to bet on the sizzle in some other guy finding a penny on the sidewalk... than they are willing to pay for the bite of steak in the guy actually getting to work in making one. Warren Buffet famously (used to) avoid any stocks that others wanted... but, he didn't just "focus on finding value" as an passive investor... he went out and found value with potential to exploit, and then made sure the value happened in those things he bought... as a non-passive investor ? He was successful enough in doing that, both finding value... and making his businesses better... that absolutely everyone in the market is now trying hard to mimic his approach to "value"... in his performance... only still without even considering trying to mimic his method. Today, I see a lot of people thinking... this is how markets work... and its never going to change ? They tend to see "change" only as a risk that might be imposed on them... as a price decline delivered by black swans ? But, what we actually see today, instead, is the realization of a different set of risks... in markets that don't actually work... and "the risk" being faced now is... that they might actually be made to start working again ? The internet was a new and disruptive innovation... twenty years ago... ? I don't see all that much innovation happening now... among the crowd of innovators obediently innovating incremental improvements in exactly what they've been told to innovate ? Black swans come in many forms ? Maybe... someone inverted your graphics when you weren't looking ? The war between "more of the same" and "now for something completely different"... has been in stasis. Getting close to time to quit carping about how effed up things have become... and just move past it ? But, yeah... whatever that means... it seems that it's going to require more copper...

To: gg cox who wrote (182162)	1/2/2022 6:05:39 PM
From: gg cox	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217574

<<<<< Stillwater,,, Wheaton River,, Sprott invested,, insiders adding again etc , etc..>>>>> Insiders up their ownership twice more in the last week,, I like it Sprott in the same category as Robert Freedland reputation wise….,@ 9 percent ownership Robert Freedland riffing on the future of mining in our greening new world ,, video below. Great! Of particular interest to me the subject of new way of financing new mines through streaming @35 minutes which genm has already accomplished at $240 million for gold and platinum stream with Wheaton. Generation mining management,,, stellar,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, errrrrr so far :+)