Investing Thread

[StillAWarrior]

I’m taking a spin at the roulette wheel on NOK. Just placed an order for a few hundred shares.

I didn't buy nearly as much, but yeah...this one hasn't aged well.

[MU82]

Institutional Investor unveiled the 20th edition of its Rich List, one of the most watched rankings of hedge fund managers’ performance. Every year, financial tycoons pore over the magazine’s estimates of whose fortunes are up the most.

Last year, the top 25 managers earned $32 billion even as the economy crashed and markets wobbled. Over all, hedge funds returned 11.6 percent last year, according to Hedge Fund Research, their best performance in a decade but not enough to keep pace with the S&P 500, which was up 16 percent.

Here are the top earners, according to the list:

Izzy Englander of Millennium Management, who earned an estimated $3.8 billion and whose flagship fund produced a 26 percent return.

Jim Simons of Renaissance Technologies, who earned $2.6 billion and whose flagship generated a 76 percent return (but whose fund open to outside investors lost big).

Chase Coleman of Tiger Global Management, who earned $2.5 billion and whose top fund returned 48 percent.

Ken Griffin of Citadel, who earned $1.8 billion and whose main fund returned 24 percent. (The firm has made headlines for other reasons, too.)

Steve Cohen of Point72 Asset Management and David Tepper of Appaloosa Management both earned an estimated $1.7 billion.

The rest of the best: Philippe Laffont of Coatue Management ($1.6 billion), Andreas Halvorsen of Viking Global Investors and Scott Shleifer of Tiger Global (both $1.5 billion), and Bill Ackman of Pershing Square Capital Management ($1.4 billion).

+++

So these guys made gazillions while the funds they managed, collectively, didn't come close to gaining what a simple investment in SPY would have ... and a few of their hedge funds lost investors major money.

Good work if you can get it!

[TSmith34, Inc.]

So these guys made gazillions while the funds they managed, collectively, didn't come close to gaining what a simple investment in SPY would have ... and a few of their hedge funds lost investors major money.

Good work if you can get it!

Something the TSmith34 SPAC looks to emulate. Send your money folks!

[We R Final Four]

+++

So these guys made gazillions while the funds they managed, collectively, didn't come close to gaining what a simple investment in SPY would have ... and a few of their hedge funds lost investors major money.

Good work if you can get it!

Yep—it’s like the Fat Jacks and Slim Jims of the world. They make a ton of $ on providing info...not on the bet.
If they were on the wrong side of the bet?.....doesn’t matter! They still got paid!

[jesmu84]

Gamestop

[tower912]

Crap.   I bet my entire portfolio on UNC. 

[MU82]

Disney cracked 200 today. Despite the crushing hit their earnings were dealt by the pandemic.

DIS is a resilient, well-run company. Smartly pivoted to streaming.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Yeah, I must be ready for a sweater vest because I don't get this (from NYT Morning Brief):

People are paying big money for gifs

"Last month, someone bought an animated gif of a flying cat for more than $500,000. A short video by the artist Beeple went for almost $7 million. Anyone can still view or share the clips. So what’s the point of owning them?

It may not make sense to everyone — and has elements of a financial bubble. It mostly comes down to very expensive bragging rights, as well as the potential of reselling it for more money.

These rights are known as NFTs, short for “nonfungible tokens.” “It seems crazy to do that for something purely digital that can be easily copied and shared across the internet,” Erin Griffith, a Times tech reporter who has written about the trend, told us. “But the popularity of NFTs shows that people are willing to pay for special, scarce collector’s items.”

The technology has made it easier for artists, musicians and sports franchises to make money from digital goods. The N.B.A. recently introduced a series of NFTs, Top Shot, that turn highlight clips into trading cards. In music, the latest album by Kings of Leon is an NFT."

[Not A Serious Person]

Yeah, I must be ready for a sweater vest because I don't get this (from NYT Morning Brief):

People are paying big money for gifs

"Last month, someone bought an animated gif of a flying cat for more than $500,000. A short video by the artist Beeple went for almost $7 million. Anyone can still view or share the clips. So what’s the point of owning them?

It may not make sense to everyone — and has elements of a financial bubble. It mostly comes down to very expensive bragging rights, as well as the potential of reselling it for more money.

These rights are known as NFTs, short for “nonfungible tokens.” “It seems crazy to do that for something purely digital that can be easily copied and shared across the internet,” Erin Griffith, a Times tech reporter who has written about the trend, told us. “But the popularity of NFTs shows that people are willing to pay for special, scarce collector’s items.”

The technology has made it easier for artists, musicians and sports franchises to make money from digital goods. The N.B.A. recently introduced a series of NFTs, Top Shot, that turn highlight clips into trading cards. In music, the latest album by Kings of Leon is an NFT."

How is this different from Honus Wagner baseball cards, game-used jerseys, vintage Air Jordans, Warhols, Rembrandts, or 1960s Muscle Cars?

Do you find those purchases equally baffling?

[Hards Alumni]

How is this different from Honus Wagner baseball cards, game-used jerseys, vintage Air Jordans, Warhols, Rembrandts, or 1960s Muscle Cars?

Do you find those purchases equally baffling?

You don't seem to understand scarcity in this instance.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

How is this different from Honus Wagner baseball cards, game-used jerseys, vintage Air Jordans, Warhols, Rembrandts, or 1960s Muscle Cars?

Do you find those purchases equally baffling?

Because a digital version of a flying cat gif can be copied with 100% accuracy an infinite amount of times. Despite you owning a token saying that own the original, every other infinite number of copies are identical.

[jficke13]

https://twitter.com/DjangoWexler/status/1369712177418956801?s=20

Prediction: NFT frenzy burns itself out in a year tops.

Actionable advice: Get in if you can and extract EXTREMELY SHORT TERM profits. Flip assets the same day you buy them, bleed suckers who are going to be stuck holding the tulip bulbs in 1638.

[MUBurrow]

You don't seem to understand scarcity in this instance.

Idk if I agree.  There are a lot of hallmarks of the collectors items Heisy mentioned that can be faked, but would otherwise look just like the original.  Collectors cars without the original parts, signed sports memorabilia that is forged or even less dramatically is just signed at a different time that makes one less valuable than the others, prints of art, etc.  What makes those things valuable are that the authentic version is "the one" and the knowledge of that authenticity.  Granted i just learned about NFTs today, so what the hell do I know, but it seems the blockchain code is meant to replicate that "the one-ness."  I'm torn about whether NFTs are difference in type or difference in degree to what Heisy mentioned.  Are they really altogether different things than tangible collectors' items, or just a different medium that is harder for us fogies to relate to?  (Ed. note - I do hope it is the former because this does have a very Black Mirror feel about it that bums me out.)

[MU82]

Because a digital version of a flying cat gif can be copied with 100% accuracy an infinite amount of times. Despite you owning a token saying that own the original, every other infinite number of copies are identical.

Damn ... so you're saying I shouldn't have ponied up more than $500K for that animated gif of a flying cat?

[Hards Alumni]

Idk if I agree.  There are a lot of hallmarks of the collectors items Heisy mentioned that can be faked, but would otherwise look just like the original.  Collectors cars without the original parts, signed sports memorabilia that is forged or even less dramatically is just signed at a different time that makes one less valuable than the others, prints of art, etc.  What makes those things valuable are that the authentic version is "the one" and the knowledge of that authenticity.  Granted i just learned about NFTs today, so what the hell do I know, but it seems the blockchain code is meant to replicate that "the one-ness."  I'm torn about whether NFTs are difference in type or difference in degree to what Heisy mentioned.  Are they really altogether different things than tangible collectors' items, or just a different medium that is harder for us fogies to relate to?  (Ed. note - I do hope it is the former because this does have a very Black Mirror feel about it that bums me out.)

But we aren't talking about forgeries.  We are talking about copies.  And the copy you bought can be copied without defect an infinite number of times and the 'owner' of that original gains nothing from each copy.  They own no rights to the actual data.  I'm going to catch heat for this, but it is a lot like buying stock in the Packers a few years ago.  You have a fancy piece of paper that says you own something... but with the Packer's stock, you actually get to vote on some BS every year... but ultimately, you bought a vote.

[MUBurrow]

But we aren't talking about forgeries.  We are talking about copies.  And the copy you bought can be copied without defect an infinite number of times and the 'owner' of that original gains nothing from each copy.  They own no rights to the actual data.  I'm going to catch heat for this, but it is a lot like buying stock in the Packers a few years ago.  You have a fancy piece of paper that says you own something... but with the Packer's stock, you actually get to vote on some BS every year... but ultimately, you bought a vote.

Point well taken on forgeries.  But tangible originals are valuable despite the wide availability of copies all the time.  Stamped autographs, art prints, statue reproductions, etc.  None of the reproductions have any value, but the authentic original often remains very valuable, and I would venture to guess that's often not just tied to the ability to profit on royalties.  I'm not saying NFTs aren't weird, but I'm not sure these are of a completely different species than tangible collectibles.

[StillAWarrior]

I have a question that is not exactly "investing" but it is from the finance/banking world, so perhaps it could be described as "investing adjacent." People here have such varied experience, I figure someone might know and I couldn't think of any thread where it would be more appropriate.

In a banking environment (GS specifically, if it matters), what is a "staffer"? What do they do? What, if anything, does it mean to someone's career trajectory? I understand that there aren't too many of them (and that it's unrelated to the usual Analyst, Associate, VP, etc., career progression), but I don't really understand what it is. I saw this definition but I was wondering if anyone knew anything more (or if they knew that this definition is garbage).

[JWags85]

I have a question that is not exactly "investing" but it is from the finance/banking world, so perhaps it could be described as "investing adjacent." People here have such varied experience, I figure someone might know and I couldn't think of any thread where it would be more appropriate.

In a banking environment (GS specifically, if it matters), what is a "staffer"? What do they do? What, if anything, does it mean to someone's career trajectory? I understand that there aren't too many of them (and that it's unrelated to the usual Analyst, Associate, VP, etc., career progression), but I don't really understand what it is. I saw this definition but I was wondering if anyone knew anything more (or if they knew that this definition is garbage).

Do you have a context or an article in which you saw it?  That might help

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Idk if I agree.  There are a lot of hallmarks of the collectors items Heisy mentioned that can be faked, but would otherwise look just like the original.  Collectors cars without the original parts, signed sports memorabilia that is forged or even less dramatically is just signed at a different time that makes one less valuable than the others, prints of art, etc.  What makes those things valuable are that the authentic version is "the one" and the knowledge of that authenticity.  Granted i just learned about NFTs today, so what the hell do I know, but it seems the blockchain code is meant to replicate that "the one-ness."  I'm torn about whether NFTs are difference in type or difference in degree to what Heisy mentioned.  Are they really altogether different things than tangible collectors' items, or just a different medium that is harder for us fogies to relate to?  (Ed. note - I do hope it is the former because this does have a very Black Mirror feel about it that bums me out.)

I think where the the analogy breaks down with collector cars and the like is that imagine there were an infinite amount of absolutely identical copies and you didn't have to pay a penny to own or use one. What value does the original have?

Further, the owner of the NFT can't monetize their purchase through licensing, etc. Basically, they can only hope someone else is willing to pay more, the Greater Fool theory.

I'm not seeing a big difference between buying a flying cat gif and buying a pet rock, other than about $499,997.

[Not A Serious Person]

https://twitter.com/DjangoWexler/status/1369712177418956801?s=20

Prediction: NFT frenzy burns itself out in a year tops.

Actionable advice: Get in if you can and extract EXTREMELY SHORT TERM profits. Flip assets the same day you buy them, bleed suckers who are going to be stuck holding the tulip bulbs in 1638.

It depends on what you mean by NFT frenzy?

If you mean digital art prices will peak, sure?  But who cares, this is a side-show.

But if you mean the concept of a Non-Fungible Token (NFT) will disappear altogether, I will definitely take the other side of this trade, and I am in a big way.  NFTs are the big game-changer that will disrupt financial business like nothing before it.

Mark Cuban is making a huge bet on them.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/22/mark-cuban-the-business-id-start-now-would-center-around-blockchain.html

Ditto Alexis Ohanian
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/08/reddits-alexis-ohanian-nfts-trading-card-boom-will-be-big-for-womens-sports.html

Bottom line DeFi (decentralized finance) and NFTs are going to turn the current CeFi (centralized finance) on its head.  They are ride-sharing and traditional banks are taxis.

I'd be most worried if I work at a large bank, traditional banks will be about as lucrative as a taxi medallion in 5 to 10 years.

[Not A Serious Person]

I think where the the analogy breaks down with collector cars and the like is that imagine there were an infinite amount of absolutely identical copies and you didn't have to pay a penny to own or use one. What value does the original have?

Further, the owner of the NFT can't monetize their purchase through licensing, etc. Basically, they can only hope someone else is willing to pay more, the Greater Fool theory.

I'm not seeing a big difference between buying a flying cat gif and buying a pet rock, other than about $499,997.

I think we are confusing digital art (and its desirability) and NFTs.  One is a personal taste/preference, the other is a new technology that has powerful disruptive potential.

[Hards Alumni]

It depends on what you mean by NFT frenzy?

If you mean digital art prices will peak, sure?  But who cares, this is a side-show.

But if you mean the concept of a Non-Fungible Token (NFT) will disappear altogether, I will definitely take the other side of this trade, and I am in a big way.  NFTs are the big game-changer that will disrupt financial business like nothing before it.

Mark Cuban is making a huge bet on them.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/22/mark-cuban-the-business-id-start-now-would-center-around-blockchain.html

Ditto Alexis Ohanian
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/08/reddits-alexis-ohanian-nfts-trading-card-boom-will-be-big-for-womens-sports.html

Bottom line DeFi (decentralized finance) and NFTs are going to turn the current CeFi (centralized finance) on its head.  They are ride-sharing and traditional banks are taxis.

I'd be most worried if I work at a large bank, they will be about as lucrative as a taxi medallion in 5 to 10 years.

This I can agree with.  Learning about DeFi is essential to anyone who is interested in investment.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

It depends on what you mean by NFT frenzy?

If you mean digital art prices will peak, sure?  But who cares, this is a side-show.

But if you mean the concept of a Non-Fungible Token (NFT) will disappear altogether, I will definitely take the other side of this trade, and I am in a big way.  NFTs are the big game-changer that will disrupt financial business like nothing before it.

Mark Cuban is making a huge bet on them.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/22/mark-cuban-the-business-id-start-now-would-center-around-blockchain.html

Ditto Alexis Ohanian
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/08/reddits-alexis-ohanian-nfts-trading-card-boom-will-be-big-for-womens-sports.html

Bottom line DeFi (decentralized finance) and NFTs are going to turn the current CeFi (centralized finance) on its head.  They are ride-sharing and traditional banks are taxis.

I'd be most worried if I work at a large bank, they will be about as lucrative as a taxi medallion in 5 to 10 years.

I agree with this, NFTs will have uses, but that is separate from the value of a flying cat gif with an NFT attached to it.

[Not A Serious Person]

NFTs will change our understanding of the capital stack ... what is equity and what is a bond within the existing capital structure.

Companies will be able to slice and dice their equity ownership and financing possibilities in ways they cannot even imagine now. 

Companies can sell ownership in specific products, business lines or even RD projects (each is its own NFT token). With the ability to program smart contracts within an NFT, they can program in royalties that revert back to the company.

When it comes to financing, they can borrow against specific assets, goodwill, or even future revenues. Again, with smart contracts, covenants can be programmed in.

This might explain why the coming coinbase IPO might be valued more than the ICE/NYSE.  The NYSE is a dying technology.

Bottom line, the concept of a stock market/bond market could go away ... it will be replaced with something far more robust with far better opportunities.

[Hards Alumni]

NFTs will change our understanding of the capital stack ... what is equity and what is a bond within the existing capital structure.

Companies will be able to slice and dice their equity ownership and financing possibilities in ways they cannot even imagine now. 

Companies can sell ownership in specific products, business lines or even RD projects (each is its own NFT token). With the ability to program smart contracts within an NFT, they can program in royalties that revert back to the company.

When it comes to financing, they can borrow against specific assets, goodwill, or even future revenues. Again, with smart contracts, covenants can be programmed in.

This might explain why the coming coinbase IPO might be valued more than the ICE/NYSE.  The NYSE is a dying technology.

Bottom line, the concept of a stock market/bond market could go away ... it will be replaced with something far more robust with far better opportunities.

Agree.  Coinbase IPO is getting a healthy chunk of my funny munny.