I like brave calls as you know, RYM have got a couple of very big years coming up, those that truly believe the SP will reach parity are not seeing things clearly.PS-I still pick OCA as having the most upside over the next few years, once the Elephant is put to sleep.
If you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink what hope is there of making a misbehaving elephant do what you want
I think Macquarie might be a thorn in OCA shareholders side for a while so I reduced a bit of them yesterday. I'll tell myself the ciders pay for the ski lesson and your relativity theory is still a load of rubbish
Last edited by Beagle; 17-08-2018 at 02:50 PM.
Ecclesiastes 11:2: Divide your portion to seven, or even to eight, for you do not know what misfortune may occur on the earth.
Ben Graham - In the short run the market is a voting machine but in the long run the market is a weighing machine
Keep updating this chart as it gives me the warm fuzzies when I do
SUM share price has probably got ahead of itself .... chart suggests it might not go anywhere for a while or go could even drop back into that channel that's been in place for years
Share price has risen by 25% pa which is pretty good ...even though I believe earnings have grown at a faster rate than this
Just another lot of nonsense as share price should be 9 bucks ay least some say .....but I do like my chrt... been a long trade this one
Last edited by winner69; 17-08-2018 at 03:49 PM.
At the top of every bubble, everyone is convinced it's not yet a bubble.
What happens in real world is different (Behavioural Finance 303)
Though it is hard to fault a theory predicting an eventual change with only one observation period of finite length ....
However - no matter what it is - if we assume for arguments sake that Couta's theory holds water, than it does not matter whether we invest into SUM or RYM. According to Couta both will develop with the same velocity - and $1000 invested into RYM will grow as fast as $1000 invested into SUM.
However if Couta's theory is wrong, than the $ invested in SUM will grow faster. Which means - there is no drawback of investing into SUM ... you either get the same return as with RYM (according to Couta), or a better return (if Couta is wrong).
Looks different for the people investing into RYM - they either get the same return as the SUM investors, or they get less.
Given this choice - what possible reason could there be to invest into RYM, if you can put your money as well into an either equal or better performing SUM?
Given that markets are a chaotic system 2nd order ... just the existence of this thought will increase the buying pressure on SUM, which means that SUM inevitably will outgrow RYM in a rational market ;
QED.
----
"Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future" (Niels Bohr)
Though it is hard to fault a theory predicting an eventual change with only one observation period of finite length ....
However - no matter what it is - if we assume for arguments sake that Couta's theory holds water, than it does not matter whether we invest into SUM or RYM. According to Couta both will develop with the same velocity - and $1000 invested into RYM will grow as fast as $1000 invested into SUM.
However if Couta's theory is wrong, than the $ invested in SUM will grow faster. Which means - there is no drawback of investing into SUM ... you either get the same return as with RYM (according to Couta), or a better return (if Couta is wrong).
Looks different for the people investing into RYM - they either get the same return as the SUM investors, or they get less.
Given this choice - what possible reason could there be to invest into RYM, if you can put your money as well into an either equal or better performing SUM?
Given that markets are a chaotic system 2nd order ... just the existence of this thought will increase the buying pressure on SUM, which means that SUM inevitably will outgrow RYM in a rational market ;
QED.
Yes the chief campaigner of that relativity theory just admitted to me that there's no way he'd be a buyer of RYM at $13.30 so QED indeed !
SUM things make a LOT of sense like your post mate.
Last edited by Beagle; 17-08-2018 at 03:57 PM.
Ecclesiastes 11:2: Divide your portion to seven, or even to eight, for you do not know what misfortune may occur on the earth.
Ben Graham - In the short run the market is a voting machine but in the long run the market is a weighing machine
Though it is hard to fault a theory predicting an eventual change with only one observation period of finite length ....
However - no matter what it is - if we assume for arguments sake that Couta's theory holds water, than it does not matter whether we invest into SUM or RYM. According to Couta both will develop with the same velocity - and $1000 invested into RYM will grow as fast as $1000 invested into SUM.
However if Couta's theory is wrong, than the $ invested in SUM will grow faster. Which means - there is no drawback of investing into SUM ... you either get the same return as with RYM (according to Couta), or a better return (if Couta is wrong).
Looks different for the people investing into RYM - they either get the same return as the SUM investors, or they get less.
Given this choice - what possible reason could there be to invest into RYM, if you can put your money as well into an either equal or better performing SUM?
Given that markets are a chaotic system 2nd order ... just the existence of this thought will increase the buying pressure on SUM, which means that SUM inevitably will outgrow RYM in a rational market ;
QED.
Very profound .... had thought the same but didn't want to upset the apple cart ....and I didn't think rationality applied.
Suppose your argument applies if both SUM and RYM share prices fall which could result in RYM falling more ...again SUM the better bet as you wouldn't lose as much)
At the top of every bubble, everyone is convinced it's not yet a bubble.
I'm quite satisfied as my theorum has stood the test of time for near 6 years and I'm looking forward to the next 6. At the end of that period you guys will just have to accept that there's no point fighting it anymore, have a nice weekend.
I'm quite satisfied as my theorum has stood the test of time for near 6 years and I'm looking forward to the next 6. At the end of that period you guys will just have to accept that there's no point fighting it anymore, have a nice weekend.
Its easy to look at data and see a pattern, what is useful is its ability to predict the future. Hasn't the theorem been wrong since it was theorised?
Maybe in in the short term. As our friend Ben said, in the short term the share market is a voting machine, in the long term it is a weighing machine.
I’m not interested in the short term.
Funnily enough you’re both right.
Winner is referring to the efficient market hypothesis and how its not worth the paper its written on.
I think our friend Warren would prefer Ryman. Better to have a good company at a fair price than a fair company at a good price. (He’d like both companies but I think he’d prioritise RYM as he loves predictibility aand a good track record)
Last edited by Patient Panda; 17-08-2018 at 05:27 PM.
Maybe in in the short term. As our friend Ben said, in the short term the share market is a voting machine, in the long term it is a weighing machine.
I’m not interested in the short term.
Sage advice from Ben
But have you considered that with RYM and SUM it’s the weighing machine that’s in play
Relativity etc been in place quite a long time ...the voters have had their say and the scales have settled down and measuring a fair intrinsic value for both (taking everything into account)
But I feel you will disagree
Last edited by winner69; 17-08-2018 at 05:58 PM.
At the top of every bubble, everyone is convinced it's not yet a bubble.
Originally Posted by couta1
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks