y*d
2 楼
我在这个版上说了多少次了
我只投机，从不投资
赚了高兴，赔了也无所谓
你自己可以投资，可是你不能不让别人投机啊
再说了，谁告诉你投机就一定要赔钱的？
我只投机，从不投资
赚了高兴，赔了也无所谓
你自己可以投资，可是你不能不让别人投机啊
再说了，谁告诉你投机就一定要赔钱的？
R*G
3 楼
but small frogs definitely lose money.
They lack information vs. Wall Street MMs.
They can't beat MMs' High Frequency Trading system. Goldman's system only
lost 1 day in Q1.
I know you are much better but my advice wasn't intended for you. hehe
They lack information vs. Wall Street MMs.
They can't beat MMs' High Frequency Trading system. Goldman's system only
lost 1 day in Q1.
I know you are much better but my advice wasn't intended for you. hehe
c*y
4 楼
投机投资没本质区别。 界限很模糊。
主观上希望一个公司好，还是只是想获得资本收益？
持有时间长一点，也还是投机。
你看以去看看里面的阐述。我表示非常赞同。
【在 R****G 的大作中提到】
: 心态不端正，能不陪钱吗？
: Sigh.
主观上希望一个公司好，还是只是想获得资本收益？
持有时间长一点，也还是投机。
你看以去看看
【在 R****G 的大作中提到】
: 心态不端正，能不陪钱吗？
: Sigh.
c*y
5 楼
谁告诉你GS HFT system的收益？ “lose money”这词非常vague，你得break down，
而且公开的是看不到具体的performance的。
JPM也有类似headline，跟virtu这些不是一个概念，似是而非的瞎误导。
【在 R****G 的大作中提到】
: but small frogs definitely lose money.
: They lack information vs. Wall Street MMs.
: They can't beat MMs' High Frequency Trading system. Goldman's system only
: lost 1 day in Q1.
: I know you are much better but my advice wasn't intended for you. hehe
而且公开的是看不到具体的performance的。
JPM也有类似headline，跟virtu这些不是一个概念，似是而非的瞎误导。
【在 R****G 的大作中提到】
: but small frogs definitely lose money.
: They lack information vs. Wall Street MMs.
: They can't beat MMs' High Frequency Trading system. Goldman's system only
: lost 1 day in Q1.
: I know you are much better but my advice wasn't intended for you. hehe
C*G
6 楼
我老野鸡认为投机投资还是有区别的
比如这个帖子里
http://www.mitbbs.com/mitbbs_article_t.php?board=Stock&gid=3478
金融科班女大牛，
用rim方法对AT&T的定量分析的结论去买股票，吃分红吃增长，就是投资，
用野鸡TA跟庄，玩垃圾股票的momo，就是投机。
大牛指正哈。
hiahia
【在 c*******y 的大作中提到】
: 投机投资没本质区别。 界限很模糊。
: 主观上希望一个公司好，还是只是想获得资本收益？
: 持有时间长一点，也还是投机。
: 你看以去看看里面的阐述。我表示非常赞同。
比如这个帖子里
http://www.mitbbs.com/mitbbs_article_t.php?board=Stock&gid=3478
金融科班女大牛，
用rim方法对AT&T的定量分析的结论去买股票，吃分红吃增长，就是投资，
用野鸡TA跟庄，玩垃圾股票的momo，就是投机。
大牛指正哈。
hiahia
【在 c*******y 的大作中提到】
: 投机投资没本质区别。 界限很模糊。
: 主观上希望一个公司好，还是只是想获得资本收益？
: 持有时间长一点，也还是投机。
: 你看以去看看
r*C
7 楼
因人而异。
我老野鸡认为投机投资还是有区别的比如这个帖子里http://www.mitbbs.com/mitbbs_article_t.php?board=Stock
【在 C*G 的大作中提到】
: 我老野鸡认为投机投资还是有区别的
: 比如这个帖子里
: http://www.mitbbs.com/mitbbs_article_t.php?board=Stock&gid=3478
: 金融科班女大牛，
: 用rim方法对AT&T的定量分析的结论去买股票，吃分红吃增长，就是投资，
: 用野鸡TA跟庄，玩垃圾股票的momo，就是投机。
: 大牛指正哈。
: hiahia
我老野鸡认为投机投资还是有区别的比如这个帖子里http://www.mitbbs.com/mitbbs_article_t.php?board=Stock
【在 C*G 的大作中提到】
: 我老野鸡认为投机投资还是有区别的
: 比如这个帖子里
: http://www.mitbbs.com/mitbbs_article_t.php?board=Stock&gid=3478
: 金融科班女大牛，
: 用rim方法对AT&T的定量分析的结论去买股票，吃分红吃增长，就是投资，
: 用野鸡TA跟庄，玩垃圾股票的momo，就是投机。
: 大牛指正哈。
: hiahia
c*y
8 楼
这个属于理念，我的理解是你的首要目的是赚钱，那就是投机。
不管你是持有一毫秒还是20年，不管是spread还是分红。
我发那段给你看看，不
The supposed difference between investing and speculating deserves to be
explored, for it may have been getting in your way as you tried to come to
grips
with the First Axiom. We students of the Zurich Axioms frankly call
ourselves
speculators. This may make it sound to you as though you are being urged or
will be
urged to take wild and harebrained chances. You may think you'd rather be an
investor than a speculator. Being an investor sounds safer.
In truth, however, there is no difference whatever. As the plain-talking
Gerald
Loeb put it, "All investment is speculation. The only difference is that
some people
admit it and some don't."
It's like the difference between luncheon and lunch. You get the same
liverwurst
sandwich either way. The only difference is in the impression somebody wants
to
make.
People who offer to counsel you in money management almost always call
themselves "investment" advisers, not speculation advisers. It sounds more
serious
and impressive that way (and also makes for higher fees). Tip sheets,
newsletters,
and magazines serving the various speculative worlds nearly always call
themselves
"investment" publications. But they are all dealing with speculation just as
the
Zurich Axioms do. They just don't like to say it.
There is even a class of securities that financial experts like to call "
investmentgrade."
That makes them sound very dignified, awe-inspiring, and super-safe. An
adviser, talking about such a security in appropriately solemn tones, can
convince a
novice that this is the long-sought high-paying investment without risk.
Like IBM stock. IBM is the bluest of the blue chips. Its nickname around
Wall
Street is Big Blue. You're always safe buying an investment-grade security
like
IBM, right?
Sure, if you'd bought IBM at its peak price in 1973, when nearly every
adviser in
the world was touting it, you'd have had to wait nine years to get your
money back.
You would have been better off keeping your money in a sock.
There is no risk-free speculation, no matter how dignified it may sound. For
another example, take General Motors. This stock, too, has usually appeared
on
brokerage lists of the great investment-grade securities. It was on all the
lists
back in 1971, when everybody thought GM was going to own the world. There
was
nothing speculative about it, they all said. It was the kind of stock that
conservative estate executors bought for orphans. It was an investment.
But something went wrong with this wonderful investment-grade security. If
you
had bought it at its peak in 1971, you would still be waiting to get your
money back.
Calling it an investment doesn't change the facts: A gamble is still a
gamble. You'd
think they would have learned this in the debacle of 1929, when all of Wall
Street
was suddenly revealed as nothing but a gigantic roulette wheel, gobbling up
gamblers' money at a horrifying rate. The stories of 1929's great
investmentgrade
stocks can make you weep. New York Central Railroad: $257 in 1929, down to
$9 three years later. Radio Corporation, the ancestor of RCA: from $574 to $
12.
And a younger GM: from $1,075 to $40.
All investment is speculation, as Loeb said. You put up your money and you
take
your chances. You're a speculator whether you are betting on GM or anything
else.
You might as well admit it. There is no sense in trying to hoodwink yourself
. You
understand the world better when you come to it with your eyes wide open.
The Zurich Axioms are about speculation and say they are. It doesn't mean
they
are about goofy chance-taking. It means only that they are frank.
【在 C*G 的大作中提到】
: 我老野鸡认为投机投资还是有区别的
: 比如这个帖子里
: http://www.mitbbs.com/mitbbs_article_t.php?board=Stock&gid=3478
: 金融科班女大牛，
: 用rim方法对AT&T的定量分析的结论去买股票，吃分红吃增长，就是投资，
: 用野鸡TA跟庄，玩垃圾股票的momo，就是投机。
: 大牛指正哈。
: hiahia
不管你是持有一毫秒还是20年，不管是spread还是分红。
我发那段给你看看，不
The supposed difference between investing and speculating deserves to be
explored, for it may have been getting in your way as you tried to come to
grips
with the First Axiom. We students of the Zurich Axioms frankly call
ourselves
speculators. This may make it sound to you as though you are being urged or
will be
urged to take wild and harebrained chances. You may think you'd rather be an
investor than a speculator. Being an investor sounds safer.
In truth, however, there is no difference whatever. As the plain-talking
Gerald
Loeb put it, "All investment is speculation. The only difference is that
some people
admit it and some don't."
It's like the difference between luncheon and lunch. You get the same
liverwurst
sandwich either way. The only difference is in the impression somebody wants
to
make.
People who offer to counsel you in money management almost always call
themselves "investment" advisers, not speculation advisers. It sounds more
serious
and impressive that way (and also makes for higher fees). Tip sheets,
newsletters,
and magazines serving the various speculative worlds nearly always call
themselves
"investment" publications. But they are all dealing with speculation just as
the
Zurich Axioms do. They just don't like to say it.
There is even a class of securities that financial experts like to call "
investmentgrade."
That makes them sound very dignified, awe-inspiring, and super-safe. An
adviser, talking about such a security in appropriately solemn tones, can
convince a
novice that this is the long-sought high-paying investment without risk.
Like IBM stock. IBM is the bluest of the blue chips. Its nickname around
Wall
Street is Big Blue. You're always safe buying an investment-grade security
like
IBM, right?
Sure, if you'd bought IBM at its peak price in 1973, when nearly every
adviser in
the world was touting it, you'd have had to wait nine years to get your
money back.
You would have been better off keeping your money in a sock.
There is no risk-free speculation, no matter how dignified it may sound. For
another example, take General Motors. This stock, too, has usually appeared
on
brokerage lists of the great investment-grade securities. It was on all the
lists
back in 1971, when everybody thought GM was going to own the world. There
was
nothing speculative about it, they all said. It was the kind of stock that
conservative estate executors bought for orphans. It was an investment.
But something went wrong with this wonderful investment-grade security. If
you
had bought it at its peak in 1971, you would still be waiting to get your
money back.
Calling it an investment doesn't change the facts: A gamble is still a
gamble. You'd
think they would have learned this in the debacle of 1929, when all of Wall
Street
was suddenly revealed as nothing but a gigantic roulette wheel, gobbling up
gamblers' money at a horrifying rate. The stories of 1929's great
investmentgrade
stocks can make you weep. New York Central Railroad: $257 in 1929, down to
$9 three years later. Radio Corporation, the ancestor of RCA: from $574 to $
12.
And a younger GM: from $1,075 to $40.
All investment is speculation, as Loeb said. You put up your money and you
take
your chances. You're a speculator whether you are betting on GM or anything
else.
You might as well admit it. There is no sense in trying to hoodwink yourself
. You
understand the world better when you come to it with your eyes wide open.
The Zurich Axioms are about speculation and say they are. It doesn't mean
they
are about goofy chance-taking. It means only that they are frank.
【在 C*G 的大作中提到】
: 我老野鸡认为投机投资还是有区别的
: 比如这个帖子里
: http://www.mitbbs.com/mitbbs_article_t.php?board=Stock&gid=3478
: 金融科班女大牛，
: 用rim方法对AT&T的定量分析的结论去买股票，吃分红吃增长，就是投资，
: 用野鸡TA跟庄，玩垃圾股票的momo，就是投机。
: 大牛指正哈。
: hiahia
c*y
9 楼
现在好怕你，摸不清你站队站哪边的，左右逢源又两边钻营，
hiahia
【在 C*G 的大作中提到】
: 我老野鸡认为投机投资还是有区别的
: 比如这个帖子里
: http://www.mitbbs.com/mitbbs_article_t.php?board=Stock&gid=3478
: 金融科班女大牛，
: 用rim方法对AT&T的定量分析的结论去买股票，吃分红吃增长，就是投资，
: 用野鸡TA跟庄，玩垃圾股票的momo，就是投机。
: 大牛指正哈。
: hiahia
hiahia
【在 C*G 的大作中提到】
: 我老野鸡认为投机投资还是有区别的
: 比如这个帖子里
: http://www.mitbbs.com/mitbbs_article_t.php?board=Stock&gid=3478
: 金融科班女大牛，
: 用rim方法对AT&T的定量分析的结论去买股票，吃分红吃增长，就是投资，
: 用野鸡TA跟庄，玩垃圾股票的momo，就是投机。
: 大牛指正哈。
: hiahia
A*a
10 楼
来这个版的99%投机好伐，你是玩投资的话我觉得你来错了
R*G
11 楼
PG has ex-div date on 04/23. Each share will pay $0.64. Not only you can 吃
分红吃增长, you can get more fun.
For example, I got some < $81 last week. Today during the bounce, I sold
next Friday $82call for income of $0.56/share.
So if it goes above 82 before 04/23 or on 04/25, each share's gain is $0.64
+ $0.56 + ($82 - $81) for about two weeks.
If it stays < 82 next Friday, nothing happens. I keep $0.64 + 0.56. Better
than nothing.
Selling covered calls is a little fun for speculation but it will bring
additional income. I know big cows don't care little incomes. hehe
For penny stocks, what if MMs/big cows load them first and pump to small
frogs? It's like play in casinos. How do they make a living?
【在 C*G 的大作中提到】
: 我老野鸡认为投机投资还是有区别的
: 比如这个帖子里
: http://www.mitbbs.com/mitbbs_article_t.php?board=Stock&gid=3478
: 金融科班女大牛，
: 用rim方法对AT&T的定量分析的结论去买股票，吃分红吃增长，就是投资，
: 用野鸡TA跟庄，玩垃圾股票的momo，就是投机。
: 大牛指正哈。
: hiahia
分红吃增长, you can get more fun.
For example, I got some < $81 last week. Today during the bounce, I sold
next Friday $82call for income of $0.56/share.
So if it goes above 82 before 04/23 or on 04/25, each share's gain is $0.64
+ $0.56 + ($82 - $81) for about two weeks.
If it stays < 82 next Friday, nothing happens. I keep $0.64 + 0.56. Better
than nothing.
Selling covered calls is a little fun for speculation but it will bring
additional income. I know big cows don't care little incomes. hehe
For penny stocks, what if MMs/big cows load them first and pump to small
frogs? It's like play in casinos. How do they make a living?
【在 C*G 的大作中提到】
: 我老野鸡认为投机投资还是有区别的
: 比如这个帖子里
: http://www.mitbbs.com/mitbbs_article_t.php?board=Stock&gid=3478
: 金融科班女大牛，
: 用rim方法对AT&T的定量分析的结论去买股票，吃分红吃增长，就是投资，
: 用野鸡TA跟庄，玩垃圾股票的momo，就是投机。
: 大牛指正哈。
: hiahia
L*n
12 楼
其实没那么大的区别。真正的区别在于，投资的时候你假定某些东西一定会发生，比如
说价格一定趋于价值，比如说通胀一定存在，人口一定增长，科技一定发展。
当然这些东西在几十年内完全可以逆转。
相反，投机的时候往往不假定任何条件。
所以说，梦做多了就是投资
【在 C*G 的大作中提到】
: 我老野鸡认为投机投资还是有区别的
: 比如这个帖子里
: http://www.mitbbs.com/mitbbs_article_t.php?board=Stock&gid=3478
: 金融科班女大牛，
: 用rim方法对AT&T的定量分析的结论去买股票，吃分红吃增长，就是投资，
: 用野鸡TA跟庄，玩垃圾股票的momo，就是投机。
: 大牛指正哈。
: hiahia
说价格一定趋于价值，比如说通胀一定存在，人口一定增长，科技一定发展。
当然这些东西在几十年内完全可以逆转。
相反，投机的时候往往不假定任何条件。
所以说，梦做多了就是投资
【在 C*G 的大作中提到】
: 我老野鸡认为投机投资还是有区别的
: 比如这个帖子里
: http://www.mitbbs.com/mitbbs_article_t.php?board=Stock&gid=3478
: 金融科班女大牛，
: 用rim方法对AT&T的定量分析的结论去买股票，吃分红吃增长，就是投资，
: 用野鸡TA跟庄，玩垃圾股票的momo，就是投机。
: 大牛指正哈。
: hiahia
C*U
13 楼
大牛最近如何
【在 y*d 的大作中提到】
: 我在这个版上说了多少次了
: 我只投机，从不投资
: 赚了高兴，赔了也无所谓
: 你自己可以投资，可是你不能不让别人投机啊
: 再说了，谁告诉你投机就一定要赔钱的？
【在 y*d 的大作中提到】
: 我在这个版上说了多少次了
: 我只投机，从不投资
: 赚了高兴，赔了也无所谓
: 你自己可以投资，可是你不能不让别人投机啊
: 再说了，谁告诉你投机就一定要赔钱的？
i*y
14 楼
跟野鸡是赌博，在英文里投机是很神圣的词好不好，需要高超的智慧。
【在 C*G 的大作中提到】
: 我老野鸡认为投机投资还是有区别的
: 比如这个帖子里
: http://www.mitbbs.com/mitbbs_article_t.php?board=Stock&gid=3478
: 金融科班女大牛，
: 用rim方法对AT&T的定量分析的结论去买股票，吃分红吃增长，就是投资，
: 用野鸡TA跟庄，玩垃圾股票的momo，就是投机。
: 大牛指正哈。
: hiahia
【在 C*G 的大作中提到】
: 我老野鸡认为投机投资还是有区别的
: 比如这个帖子里
: http://www.mitbbs.com/mitbbs_article_t.php?board=Stock&gid=3478
: 金融科班女大牛，
: 用rim方法对AT&T的定量分析的结论去买股票，吃分红吃增长，就是投资，
: 用野鸡TA跟庄，玩垃圾股票的momo，就是投机。
: 大牛指正哈。
: hiahia
y*d
15 楼
别叫我大牛
我都亏飞了
【在 C***U 的大作中提到】
: 大牛最近如何
c*t
16 楼
投机还能喝点儿汤，投资只能任人宰割，不信你去问问那些07,08年投资了一辈子在腰
斩时候退市的老爷爷老奶奶们
斩时候退市的老爷爷老奶奶们
g*c
17 楼
心态端正，也赚不到钱
投资本身就是投机
就是一种概率活动
牛逼+运气+门路=赚钱
其他情况都是亏钱
心态端正不端正真的跟赚钱没屁关系
【在 R****G 的大作中提到】
: 心态不端正，能不陪钱吗？
: Sigh.
投资本身就是投机
就是一种概率活动
牛逼+运气+门路=赚钱
其他情况都是亏钱
心态端正不端正真的跟赚钱没屁关系
【在 R****G 的大作中提到】
: 心态不端正，能不陪钱吗？
: Sigh.
R*G
18 楼
投资 needs disciplines.
譬如说，目前联储会敢消减QE, 将来敢涨利息，说明它对近期经济看好。那就得抄家伙
上。
象2007年下半年联储狂砍利率，每次3*0.25%，还在连夜砍都等不及开正式会议，你们
就撒丫跑呗， 赶快换成tlt。
你们如果爱顶风作案，爱被忽悠买penny stocks，从不反省，那只好怨天尤人。
【在 g***c 的大作中提到】
: 心态端正，也赚不到钱
: 投资本身就是投机
: 就是一种概率活动
: 牛逼+运气+门路=赚钱
: 其他情况都是亏钱
: 心态端正不端正真的跟赚钱没屁关系
譬如说，目前联储会敢消减QE, 将来敢涨利息，说明它对近期经济看好。那就得抄家伙
上。
象2007年下半年联储狂砍利率，每次3*0.25%，还在连夜砍都等不及开正式会议，你们
就撒丫跑呗， 赶快换成tlt。
你们如果爱顶风作案，爱被忽悠买penny stocks，从不反省，那只好怨天尤人。
【在 g***c 的大作中提到】
: 心态端正，也赚不到钱
: 投资本身就是投机
: 就是一种概率活动
: 牛逼+运气+门路=赚钱
: 其他情况都是亏钱
: 心态端正不端正真的跟赚钱没屁关系
C*U
19 楼
30倍 亏了一半还有15倍
【在 y*d 的大作中提到】
:
: 别叫我大牛
: 我都亏飞了
【在 y*d 的大作中提到】
:
: 别叫我大牛
: 我都亏飞了
r*t
20 楼
MARK
【在 R****G 的大作中提到】
: 投资 needs disciplines.
: 譬如说，目前联储会敢消减QE, 将来敢涨利息，说明它对近期经济看好。那就得抄家伙
: 上。
: 象2007年下半年联储狂砍利率，每次3*0.25%，还在连夜砍都等不及开正式会议，你们
: 就撒丫跑呗， 赶快换成tlt。
: 你们如果爱顶风作案，爱被忽悠买penny stocks，从不反省，那只好怨天尤人。
【在 R****G 的大作中提到】
: 投资 needs disciplines.
: 譬如说，目前联储会敢消减QE, 将来敢涨利息，说明它对近期经济看好。那就得抄家伙
: 上。
: 象2007年下半年联储狂砍利率，每次3*0.25%，还在连夜砍都等不及开正式会议，你们
: 就撒丫跑呗， 赶快换成tlt。
: 你们如果爱顶风作案，爱被忽悠买penny stocks，从不反省，那只好怨天尤人。
T*y
21 楼
哈哈，不错。
买个股股票都是赌博，trading才是投资。
【在 i********y 的大作中提到】
: 跟野鸡是赌博，在英文里投机是很神圣的词好不好，需要高超的智慧。
买个股股票都是赌博，trading才是投资。
【在 i********y 的大作中提到】
: 跟野鸡是赌博，在英文里投机是很神圣的词好不好，需要高超的智慧。
相关阅读