IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Economics, Business and Finance
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 9th February 2021, 09:15 AM   #441
lobosrul5
Master Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,397
Originally Posted by Orphia Nay View Post
You may be right, but I was talking about trading technology "seeing" the course of sales on the market and getting in on the action.

They can do this far quicker and more profitably than a newbie Redditor deciding to play the market for the first time. In fact, quicker and more profitably than many people.
Right, they're doing this with algorithms on computers. By seeing it first, I don't mean a person is actually looking and deciding to make a trade. They get that little extra time to execute a trade or not, by looking at trends on what the retail traders are doing.
lobosrul5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2021, 12:45 PM   #442
trustbutverify
Philosopher
 
trustbutverify's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,082
Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
It's fair to question whether gamestop has ANY underlying value. Their business model is outdated. People have moved on to buying their games in other ways, and this trend looks like it will continue.

Trying to run the company like this will turn around is just creating a giant hole for people to dump their money in.
It is a fair question. The underlying value would be reflected in the price a mass electronic market would settle on if, theoretically, there was no price manipulation and other poker style trading games going on. At this point, it wouldn't be zero.
__________________
"To me, Hitler is the greatest man who ever lived. He truly is without fault, so simple and at the same time possessed of masculine strength"
-Leni Riefenstahl
Wollen owns the stage
trustbutverify is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2021, 12:49 PM   #443
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 23,527
Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
It's fair to question whether gamestop has ANY underlying value. Their business model is outdated. People have moved on to buying their games in other ways, and this trend looks like it will continue.

Trying to run the company like this will turn around is just creating a giant hole for people to dump their money in.
I haven't bought there recently, but when I was trying to get a certain console for under the holiday tree, they were one of the reputable outlets that I shopped at. Online, of course.

Just because Amazon is huge does not mean that there isn't room for other, more specialized, retail outlets online. Gamestop has the name recognition to make that work. Whether they do make it work is a separate question.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2021, 02:22 PM   #444
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 53,625
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
I haven't bought there recently, but when I was trying to get a certain console for under the holiday tree, they were one of the reputable outlets that I shopped at. Online, of course.

Just because Amazon is huge does not mean that there isn't room for other, more specialized, retail outlets online. Gamestop has the name recognition to make that work. Whether they do make it work is a separate question.
I'm not sure Gamestop has the name recognition to make it work anymore. Blockbuster had the name recognition to make mail-order video work. Instead, "Blockbuster" became synonymous with "dinosaur whose lunch is being eaten by Netflix (and then Amazon, and now everyone else)."

Gamestop seems to be garnering the name recognition of "dinosaur whose lunch is being eaten by Steam, GOG, and every console game store."
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 10:38 AM   #445
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 23,527
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I'm not sure Gamestop has the name recognition to make it work anymore. Blockbuster had the name recognition to make mail-order video work. Instead, "Blockbuster" became synonymous with "dinosaur whose lunch is being eaten by Netflix (and then Amazon, and now everyone else)."

Gamestop seems to be garnering the name recognition of "dinosaur whose lunch is being eaten by Steam, GOG, and every console game store."
Fair, I am not their target demo. I'm an old who has kids who game, not an old who games.

Gamestop was the neighborhood store that allowed me to feed that side of them when they were growing up, just as my folks took me to the local record store to buy tapes.

I wonder if they see the Blockbuster writing on the wall and can turn things around. I don't know, but the Chewy guy thinks there is a chance, right?
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 11:44 AM   #446
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 12,070
Originally Posted by trustbutverify View Post
It is a fair question. The underlying value would be reflected in the price a mass electronic market would settle on if, theoretically, there was no price manipulation and other poker style trading games going on. At this point, it wouldn't be zero.
That is not where a companies underlying value comes from, and real value could well be zero. Business value comes from their ability to earn money for their investors, companies that can't be expected to earn money should have no value. Even if the business has no value the company may own assets that are worth something, but this goes towards paying off any debts first.
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 12:11 PM   #447
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 12,070
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
I haven't bought there recently, but when I was trying to get a certain console for under the holiday tree, they were one of the reputable outlets that I shopped at. Online, of course.

Just because Amazon is huge does not mean that there isn't room for other, more specialized, retail outlets online. Gamestop has the name recognition to make that work. Whether they do make it work is a separate question.
One of the criticisms of GameStop is that they were too slow to respond to the shifting market and are poorly positioned in the online space. Game consoles are not something that require a specialty retailer online, and the games themselves (where the money I actually made) has moved to digital distribution. GameStop just isnít needed in the distribution chain anymore. They are as much a dead-end as Blockbuster was 2 decades ago for movies.
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 12:22 PM   #448
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 12,070
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post

I wonder if they see the Blockbuster writing on the wall and can turn things around.
It's too late for that. The service they provide is no longer required. The only thing left for Gamestop is to close store after store and try to scrape whatever earnings they can from what's left of their business model. Trying to rebuild the company at this point is almost certainly throwing away shareholder money.

As a trivia note there is 1 Blockbuster store in the entire world and it is trying to stay afloat by selling sleepovers on Airbnb.
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 12:27 PM   #449
lobosrul5
Master Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,397
Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
One of the criticisms of GameStop is that they were too slow to respond to the shifting market and are poorly positioned in the online space. Game consoles are not something that require a specialty retailer online, and the games themselves (where the money I actually made) has moved to digital distribution. GameStop just isn’t needed in the distribution chain anymore. They are as much a dead-end as Blockbuster was 2 decades ago for movies.
You are partially right. More and more However, sometimes people want that "quick fix" of buying something and not waiting for it to be shipped. Especially for hardware. But also the games themselves. Theres a few problems with the online dist model. First it takes time to wait for them to download... then there are data caps. I was on a 300GB per month with a DSL provider for a few years, when a single game eats up 50GB or more that can be problematic. Even now I'm on a 1.2GB data cap with Comcast the only other option here. Blockbusters not exactly analogous, people still do buy optical media. Its just, why would you rent when you can stream? Other than people on ****** DSL like I was I guess.

Gamestop's biggest problem is that they became annoying to shop at. You are constantly pushed to buy warranties and add-on BS. Years ago that happened to me and I almost just walked out of the store, I don't want a 10 minute sales pitch when I buy something. If I need something now I just buy it at Wally world, even though its a frickin zoo.

Last edited by lobosrul5; 10th February 2021 at 12:28 PM.
lobosrul5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 12:45 PM   #450
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 12,070
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
You are partially right. More and more However, sometimes people want that "quick fix" of buying something and not waiting for it to be shipped. Especially for hardware. But also the games themselves. Theres a few problems with the online dist model. First it takes time to wait for them to download... then there are data caps. I was on a 300GB per month with a DSL provider for a few years, when a single game eats up 50GB or more that can be problematic. Even now I'm on a 1.2GB data cap with Comcast the only other option here. Blockbusters not exactly analogous, people still do buy optical media. Its just, why would you rent when you can stream? Other than people on ****** DSL like I was I guess.

Gamestop's biggest problem is that they became annoying to shop at. You are constantly pushed to buy warranties and add-on BS. Years ago that happened to me and I almost just walked out of the store, I don't want a 10 minute sales pitch when I buy something. If I need something now I just buy it at Wally world, even though its a frickin zoo.
You can buy game consoles anywhere and Walmart can do higher volumes at lower prices. I was a diehard for buying PC games in retail stores, but even I gave up over a decade ago when the only thing in the retail box was a code to add the game to your Steam account.

Iím not quite sure why consoles have held to physical media longer, because Sony and Microsoft could easily distribute everything digitally the Apple does with the Apple Store, Google does with the Play Store and Steam does for PC games. Getting software that way is the norm these days, and the only reason I can think of for continued use of physical media for console games is so they can sell you another copy when it breaks.
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 01:27 PM   #451
lobosrul5
Master Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,397
Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
You can buy game consoles anywhere and Walmart can do higher volumes at lower prices. I was a diehard for buying PC games in retail stores, but even I gave up over a decade ago when the only thing in the retail box was a code to add the game to your Steam account.

Iím not quite sure why consoles have held to physical media longer, because Sony and Microsoft could easily distribute everything digitally the Apple does with the Apple Store, Google does with the Play Store and Steam does for PC games. Getting software that way is the norm these days, and the only reason I can think of for continued use of physical media for console games is so they can sell you another copy when it breaks.
There is a Gamestop literally next door to my nearest Walmart. I used to go in there on occasion because it was more convenient... but like I said they pissed me of. I haven't been a console player for quite a while, well except an Nvidia Shield TV. But I thought buying the physical copy of a game was now optional on the newest consoles? Maybe not. But for some people a Blu-ray sized download is problematic.
lobosrul5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 02:19 PM   #452
SuburbanTurkey
Penultimate Amazing
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 11,064
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
There is a Gamestop literally next door to my nearest Walmart. I used to go in there on occasion because it was more convenient... but like I said they pissed me of. I haven't been a console player for quite a while, well except an Nvidia Shield TV. But I thought buying the physical copy of a game was now optional on the newest consoles? Maybe not. But for some people a Blu-ray sized download is problematic.
Gamestop did have the benefit of having a decent used selection of both games and consoles that you can't find in generic box stores, but the prices were generally pretty poor compared to eBay. Their trade-in values were notoriously awful .
__________________
Gobble gobble
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2021, 07:26 PM   #453
trustbutverify
Philosopher
 
trustbutverify's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,082
Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
That is not where a companies underlying value comes from, and real value could well be zero. Business value comes from their ability to earn money for their investors, companies that can't be expected to earn money should have no value. Even if the business has no value the company may own assets that are worth something, but this goes towards paying off any debts first.
You should probably have read my comment more carefully. I never claimed a company's underlying value "comes from" its stock price. I said it's underlying value will be reflected by that price, aside from the poker style strategies used by short term traders. In this case, "reflected by" is actually the opposite of "comes from".

Edit: My apologies. Even though the share price will reflect, in part, the underlying value... it determines the market value. You're right.
__________________
"To me, Hitler is the greatest man who ever lived. He truly is without fault, so simple and at the same time possessed of masculine strength"
-Leni Riefenstahl
Wollen owns the stage

Last edited by trustbutverify; 10th February 2021 at 09:18 PM.
trustbutverify is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2021, 08:50 AM   #454
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 12,070
Originally Posted by trustbutverify View Post
You should probably have read my comment more carefully. I never claimed a company's underlying value "comes from" its stock price. I said it's underlying value will be reflected by that price,
Not always.

Originally Posted by trustbutverify View Post
aside from the poker style strategies used by short term traders. In this case, "reflected by" is actually the opposite of "comes from".
You have it fundamentally backwards. Short sellers seek out companies that are trading above their underlying value and have the effect of pushing overvalued stock prices down to something more reflective of it's underlying value.

When short sellers are forced out of the market bubbles begin to expand rapidly. this is when normal people lose a LOT of money because they usually end up buying the shares at inflated prices then take a big loss when the price declines to something more reflective of the companies underlying value.


What typically happens at this point is that the people who bough the shares when they are overvalued see that the remaining short sellers are making money while they are losing money and blame them for "taking my money" when in fact the people who took their money were in fact the ones who sold them overpriced shares in the first place. Often, but not always, the loss could have been avoided if there were enough short sellers to keep the price from blowing up in the first place.
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2021, 12:11 PM   #455
xjx388
Moderator
Moderator
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 10,064
Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
Not always.



You have it fundamentally backwards. Short sellers seek out companies that are trading above their underlying value and have the effect of pushing overvalued stock prices down to something more reflective of it's underlying value.

When short sellers are forced out of the market bubbles begin to expand rapidly. this is when normal people lose a LOT of money because they usually end up buying the shares at inflated prices then take a big loss when the price declines to something more reflective of the companies underlying value.


What typically happens at this point is that the people who bough the shares when they are overvalued see that the remaining short sellers are making money while they are losing money and blame them for "taking my money" when in fact the people who took their money were in fact the ones who sold them overpriced shares in the first place. Often, but not always, the loss could have been avoided if there were enough short sellers to keep the price from blowing up in the first place.

I understand what you are trying to say here, but I donít think itís so cut and dried. Itís not like we can say short sellers are always right; they are gambling too.

A companyís value on the stock market is always based on perception. A conservative investors view of the company might be based on its fundamentals: cash flow, assets, etc etc. But other investors might see something encouraging beyond what the fundamentals show -those intangibles that arenít reflected in fundamentals -new management, a promising new product. Another investor might value a company lower than a fundamental analysis would based on other intangibles like a shift in the companyís core business or bad management. Still other investors are pure speculators, trying to cash in based on their own hunches or analysis of short interest, etc.

In the end, a companyís stock price is reflective of the collective perception of all those things: bulls, bears and crazy people.

So when you buy a stock, itís not that someone is selling you something overvalued or undervalued -those are just perceptions. You are, presumably, buying the stock at the price you are buying it because YOU think the price will go up. They are selling it because they want to realize a gain or stop a loss -they think the price will come down.

You seem to be describing a very efficient market that behaves in predictable ways. That simply does not exist.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2021, 01:35 PM   #456
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 12,070
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
I understand what you are trying to say here, but I donít think itís so cut and dried. Itís not like we can say short sellers are always right; they are gambling too.
I never said they were always right, but if they are wrong the stock will en up undervalued until value investors swoop in to capitalize on that opportunity. By and large value investors are pretty quick to snap up undervalued stocks. There is more risk involved in short selling so they tend to not be as efficient in driving down the price of an overvalued company.

Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
A companyís value on the stock market is always based on perception.
Thatís misleading at best. A companies real value is based on itís future earnings. It also helps if there is a clear path for those earnings ending up in the investors pocket. (If a company is just going to squander itís earrings on dead end business ventures itís worthless regardless of ho much it makes)

These are estimates of future earnings, and peoples estimates may vary. You also need to assign a discount rate to perform the net present value calculations, and people may choose different discount rates based on their expected rate of return. I would not classify either of these as ďperceptionĒ at worst they are educated guesses. Other metrics are mostly just ways to qualify future earnings or compare similar companies.
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2021, 04:34 PM   #457
xjx388
Moderator
Moderator
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 10,064
Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
I never said they were always right, but if they are wrong the stock will en up undervalued until value investors swoop in to capitalize on that opportunity. By and large value investors are pretty quick to snap up undervalued stocks. There is more risk involved in short selling so they tend to not be as efficient in driving down the price of an overvalued company.



That’s misleading at best. A companies real value is based on it’s future earnings.
Not even, because no one has a crystal ball to see what the future earnings wil be. I would argue that, when it comes to stock price, there is no such thing as a company's "real value." The only thing that exists is its "perceived value," aka, the price someone is willing to buy/sell it at.

Quote:
It also helps if there is a clear path for those earnings ending up in the investors pocket. (If a company is just going to squander it’s earrings on dead end business ventures it’s worthless regardless of ho much it makes)
If a company doesn't pay dividends, which is most companies, then the only way that company is going to put money in shareholder's pockets is to create a perception of value so other investors will buy the shares at a higher price. That's it. They create that perception by announcing leadership changes, new products, a pivot to a new market, etc. But no one can predict whether or not those things will actually increase the earnings, and thus, the value of the company.

Quote:
These are estimates of future earnings, and peoples estimates may vary. You also need to assign a discount rate to perform the net present value calculations, and people may choose different discount rates based on their expected rate of return. I would not classify either of these as “perception” at worst they are educated guesses. Other metrics are mostly just ways to qualify future earnings or compare similar companies.
Ok, but none of that is predicitive of the future. They are, at best, educated guesses. They are attempts to objectively analyze whether or not a particular valuation is justified. And that's important because they are 1)attempts and 2)not really all that objective as you illustrate by admitting that estimates vary, you need to assign a discount rate (which is different, depending on the analyst), and come up with an expected rate of return, which is really just a guess.

If it were anything better than a guess, then managed funds would always and easily outperform index funds.
__________________
Hello.

Last edited by xjx388; 11th February 2021 at 04:36 PM.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2021, 04:54 PM   #458
Startz
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 616
Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
These are estimates of future earnings, and peoples estimates may vary. You also need to assign a discount rate to perform the net present value calculations, and people may choose different discount rates based on their expected rate of return. I would not classify either of these as ďperceptionĒ at worst they are educated guesses. Other metrics are mostly just ways to qualify future earnings or compare similar companies.
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Ok, but none of that is predicitive of the future. They are, at best, educated guesses. They are attempts to objectively analyze whether or not a particular valuation is justified. And that's important because they are 1)attempts and 2)not really all that objective as you illustrate by admitting that estimates vary, you need to assign a discount rate (which is different, depending on the analyst), and come up with an expected rate of return, which is really just a guess.

If it were anything better than a guess, then managed funds would always and easily outperform index funds.
That last part isn't quite right. Index funds have two advantages: They don't have to pay for research and they generally spend much less on trading costs because they aren't trading as often as managed funds.

Probably more important, new information about a company is incorporated in the price very quickly, limiting what a managed fund can earn. Efficient market theory isn't perfect, but it's mostly right.
Startz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th February 2021, 09:11 AM   #459
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 12,070
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Not even, because no one has a crystal ball to see what the future earnings wil be.

Estimate of future earnings donít need to be prefect they just need to be in the right range. This is why are called estimates. When something unexpected comes along that changes all the estimates Stock prices make will change significantly on the news.
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
If it were anything better than a guess, then managed funds would always and easily outperform index funds.
Index earnings respond to border economic conditions, which helps make them easier to estimate than individual companies.

Furthermore, they are not independent of the individual companies that make up the index. They are a composite of all the stock picking that goes on for the individual companies. The major reason why its hard to beat the performance of an index fund is that the people picking stocks are actually really good at their job. Cases where companies are over\under valued get jumped on quickly and the resulting selling or buying pushes the price closer to itís real value and takes that opportunity off the table.

Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
If a company doesn't pay dividends, which is most companies, then the only way that company is going to put money in shareholder's pockets is to create a perception of value so other investors will buy the shares at a higher price. That's it.
This is false. Retained earnings can be used to grow the business, expand into new business. Both these activities grow the size and earnings power of the company. This increase the estimates of future earnings and therefore increases the value of the company.

Retained earnings can also be used for stock buyback which increases your stake in the company and increases the value of your shares even if the company itself isnít increasing in value.

Itís still important to keep track of how a company is reinvesting retained earnings. As I said above, if they are squandering them they may as well not exist at all. This is one of the problems with GameStop. For them to turn it around they would need to invest what money they have in new business ventures and have those ventures pan out. The prospects of this donít look good, so they are probably better off returning that money to investors and letting them decide for themselves where itís best used.
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2021, 07:46 AM   #460
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 18,358
Lots of discussion as to whether Gamestop has any real value. Looking at their financials, the book value of their stockholder's equity is almost certainly less than $0. As of 1/31/20 the book value was $661 million and the TTM net income is -$679 million. Now book value does not equal market value, but as Lomiller states, the key is the ability to generate net income, and Gamestop has no reason to expect to be able to do that in the future. They actually got a bit of a break from Covid in that it unexpectedly drove sales up temporarily, but there is no reason to expect that to continue.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2021, 10:07 AM   #461
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 60,795
I hope the new millionaires who got their gains from Gamestop stock realize they're going to have to pay short term capital gains taxes on their winnings next year. When I was gathering tax documents one institution had a gentle reminder of that on their main page, although they didn't mention Gamestop by name. If these are truly amateur investors they may not know that, and blow their fortunes on other stocks, then be horribly surprised later.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th February 2021, 03:22 PM   #462
lobosrul5
Master Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,397
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
I hope the new millionaires who got their gains from Gamestop stock realize they're going to have to pay short term capital gains taxes on their winnings next year. When I was gathering tax documents one institution had a gentle reminder of that on their main page, although they didn't mention Gamestop by name. If these are truly amateur investors they may not know that, and blow their fortunes on other stocks, then be horribly surprised later.
Actually, they have to make payment by April 15th of this year.... or pay a "penalty" which is actually just interest at the prime rate I believe. Which is very low.
lobosrul5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th February 2021, 08:38 PM   #463
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 60,795
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
Actually, they have to make payment by April 15th of this year.... or pay a "penalty" which is actually just interest at the prime rate I believe. Which is very low.
If they bought and sold in 2021 wouldn't they have until next year to pay on the gains?
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th February 2021, 11:34 PM   #464
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 26,199
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
If they bought and sold in 2021 wouldn't they have until next year to pay on the gains?
Correct.

April 15th is the deadline to pay outstanding taxes on the previous calendar year's income, so any taxes on income or capital gains earned this calendar year isn't due until April 15th, 2022.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2021, 12:39 PM   #465
lobosrul5
Master Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,397
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
Correct.

April 15th is the deadline to pay outstanding taxes on the previous calendar year's income, so any taxes on income or capital gains earned this calendar year isn't due until April 15th, 2022.
You generally have to make quarterly estimated taxes by the deadline for the quarter in which they were sold. That would mean by April 15th, 2021 for anyone selling GME in January of this year (for example), unless it was in a tax-sheltered account.

https://www.irs.gov/faqs/estimated-t...tributions-etc
https://www.investopedia.com/article...lines-2016.asp

If you don't, you must pay a penalty. Which sounds scary, but its just an interest payment on top of what you would've owed anyways. I know this. I've had to do it before.

Last edited by lobosrul5; 17th February 2021 at 12:50 PM.
lobosrul5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2021, 01:11 PM   #466
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 60,795
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
You generally have to make quarterly estimated taxes by the deadline for the quarter in which they were sold. That would mean by April 15th, 2021 for anyone selling GME in January of this year (for example), unless it was in a tax-sheltered account.

https://www.irs.gov/faqs/estimated-t...tributions-etc
https://www.investopedia.com/article...lines-2016.asp

If you don't, you must pay a penalty. Which sounds scary, but its just an interest payment on top of what you would've owed anyways. I know this. I've had to do it before.
But that all talks about taxpayers "who subsist on investment income"...what does that mean, as opposed to taxpayers who have investment income but it isn't a significant amount? And that business about it apply if you subtract your total tax from withholding...does that mean you only owe if you make more than $1000 in a capital gain? I've had investments for years, but never done anything besides plug in the numbers I get on 1099s into my annual return. I've never seen mention from the IRS of anything about this...do I just not make enough from investing to matter?

(Why can't they write this crap clearly? I am by no means not erudite but the convoluted prolixities of IRS speak confound me!)
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2021, 01:37 PM   #467
lobosrul5
Master Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,397
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
But that all talks about taxpayers "who subsist on investment income"...what does that mean, as opposed to taxpayers who have investment income but it isn't a significant amount? And that business about it apply if you subtract your total tax from withholding...does that mean you only owe if you make more than $1000 in a capital gain? I've had investments for years, but never done anything besides plug in the numbers I get on 1099s into my annual return. I've never seen mention from the IRS of anything about this...do I just not make enough from investing to matter?

(Why can't they write this crap clearly? I am by no means not erudite but the convoluted prolixities of IRS speak confound me!)
If its under $1000 they don't care. Also, I'm sure in some years past I didn't make quarterly estimated taxes when I should've and crickets, but those were years where I made maybe 2 or 3k in capital gains. Then one year, it was more like 10k, and I got what seemed to be a very scary letter in the mail explaining that I owed a penalty. What I believe happened is I was just randomly audited one year since I reported more income than usual. Most small investors just fly under the radar.

Last edited by lobosrul5; 17th February 2021 at 01:39 PM.
lobosrul5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 08:24 AM   #468
Leftus
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,759
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
(Why can't they write this crap clearly? I am by no means not erudite but the convoluted prolixities of IRS speak confound me!)
For the longest time, the publications weren't written with the common folks in mind. It was intended for tax professionals. CPAs and the like, where the inside baseball terms didn't need any real clarity.

The IRS is working on cleaning up some of this and trying to write things in plain language, as required by the Plain Writing Act (2010), but it takes time.

I no longer work in collections, but I do have some familiarity with the subject matter. Generally speaking, if you stay within the 90/100 rule (90% of current taxes withheld for the current season, or 100% of last years tax bill) you won't see much trouble. Let me sum it up with - just pay your taxes. Thanks.
Leftus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2021, 06:32 PM   #469
trustbutverify
Philosopher
 
trustbutverify's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,082
Originally Posted by trustbutverify View Post
You should probably have read my comment more carefully. I never claimed a company's underlying value "comes from" its stock price. I said it's underlying value will be reflected by that price, aside from the poker style strategies used by short term traders. In this case, "reflected by" is actually the opposite of "comes from".

Edit: My apologies. Even though the share price will reflect, in part, the underlying value... it determines the market value. You're right.
Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
You have it fundamentally backwards. Short sellers seek out companies that are trading above their underlying value and have the effect of pushing overvalued stock prices down to something more reflective of it's underlying value.

When short sellers are forced out of the market bubbles begin to expand rapidly. this is when normal people lose a LOT of money because they usually end up buying the shares at inflated prices then take a big loss when the price declines to something more reflective of the companies underlying value.


What typically happens at this point is that the people who bough the shares when they are overvalued see that the remaining short sellers are making money while they are losing money and blame them for "taking my money" when in fact the people who took their money were in fact the ones who sold them overpriced shares in the first place. Often, but not always, the loss could have been avoided if there were enough short sellers to keep the price from blowing up in the first place.
I don't understand your point. How, specifically, do I have it "fundamentally backwards"? Are you confusing the phrase short term traders with short sellers?
__________________
"To me, Hitler is the greatest man who ever lived. He truly is without fault, so simple and at the same time possessed of masculine strength"
-Leni Riefenstahl
Wollen owns the stage

Last edited by trustbutverify; 2nd March 2021 at 06:34 PM.
trustbutverify is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2021, 06:41 PM   #470
trustbutverify
Philosopher
 
trustbutverify's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,082
Originally Posted by trustbutverify View Post
You should probably have read my comment more carefully. I never claimed a company's underlying value "comes from" its stock price. I said it's underlying value will be reflected by that price,
Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
Not always.
In a market as exotic and gamed as this, "not always" is pretty much a given in every situation. However, underlying value is generally reflected, along with estimated future earnings, in the stock price.
__________________
"To me, Hitler is the greatest man who ever lived. He truly is without fault, so simple and at the same time possessed of masculine strength"
-Leni Riefenstahl
Wollen owns the stage

Last edited by trustbutverify; 2nd March 2021 at 06:46 PM.
trustbutverify is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2021, 10:46 AM   #471
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 12,070
Originally Posted by trustbutverify View Post
In a market as exotic and gamed as this, "not always" is pretty much a given in every situation.
If markets were as widely gamed as you are suggesting than it would be easy to spot mispriced stocks and actively managed funds would work a lot better than they do.
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2021, 07:24 AM   #472
trustbutverify
Philosopher
 
trustbutverify's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,082
Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
If markets were as widely gamed as you are suggesting than it would be easy to spot mispriced stocks and actively managed funds would work a lot better than they do.
I suggested gaming had increased enough in the financial markets to render your "not always" comment as a given. That does imply the market has now become wildly mispriced as a whole.

Would you please address the question I asked in post# 469?
__________________
"To me, Hitler is the greatest man who ever lived. He truly is without fault, so simple and at the same time possessed of masculine strength"
-Leni Riefenstahl
Wollen owns the stage

Last edited by trustbutverify; 6th March 2021 at 07:26 AM.
trustbutverify is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2021, 10:17 AM   #473
trustbutverify
Philosopher
 
trustbutverify's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,082
Originally Posted by trustbutverify View Post
I suggested gaming had increased enough in the financial markets to render your "not always" comment as a given. That does not imply the market has now become wildly mispriced as a whole.

Would you please address the question I asked in post# 469?
Forgive me. I left out the bolded word in the above post.
__________________
"To me, Hitler is the greatest man who ever lived. He truly is without fault, so simple and at the same time possessed of masculine strength"
-Leni Riefenstahl
Wollen owns the stage
trustbutverify is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2021, 08:53 AM   #474
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 34,804
Robinhood slapped with biggest-ever penalty by Wall Street regulator

Robinhood is being ordered to pay about $70 million for harming millions of customers. It's the largest penalty ever imposed by Wall Street's self-regulator.

The controversial trading app was accused Wednesday by the Financial Industrial Regulatory Authority of "systemic supervisory failures" and hurting investors by giving them "false or misleading information."

FINRA's sanctions on Robinhood focus on large-scale system outages that hit the platform in March 2020 as well as its options trading procedures.

CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/30/inves...nra/index.html
__________________
"When enough people make false promises, words stop meaning anything. Then there are no more answers, only better and better lies." - Jon Snow

"Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth. Sooner or later, that debt is paid." - Valery Legasov
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2021, 09:00 AM   #475
SuburbanTurkey
Penultimate Amazing
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 11,064
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Robinhood slapped with biggest-ever penalty by Wall Street regulator

Robinhood is being ordered to pay about $70 million for harming millions of customers. It's the largest penalty ever imposed by Wall Street's self-regulator.

The controversial trading app was accused Wednesday by the Financial Industrial Regulatory Authority of "systemic supervisory failures" and hurting investors by giving them "false or misleading information."

FINRA's sanctions on Robinhood focus on large-scale system outages that hit the platform in March 2020 as well as its options trading procedures.

CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/30/inves...nra/index.html
Outages were one of the problems FINRA found, but also seems to be fining them for allowing these rubes to gamble with leveraged money without making it clear they were taking a huge risk.
__________________
Gobble gobble
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2021, 02:51 PM   #476
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 52,722
So this ends the way I though it would.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Economics, Business and Finance

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:00 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.