Isn’t that technically a TRIPLE GOAT MOAT? I agree with techwiz that it appears we are in for a quadruple goat moat and beyond. The top will always be in, of course, but there’s no law saying the top can’t get higher over time. Fight me
Quote from: dragoncar on May 06, 2019, 11:30:07 AMIsn’t that technically a TRIPLE GOAT MOAT? I agree with techwiz that it appears we are in for a quadruple goat moat and beyond. The top will always be in, of course, but there’s no law saying the top can’t get higher over time. Fight meshame on you. go wash your mouth out with soap.the top is IN
Quote from: UnleashHell on May 06, 2019, 11:36:02 AMQuote from: dragoncar on May 06, 2019, 11:30:07 AMIsn’t that technically a TRIPLE GOAT MOAT? I agree with techwiz that it appears we are in for a quadruple goat moat and beyond. The top will always be in, of course, but there’s no law saying the top can’t get higher over time. Fight meshame on you. go wash your mouth out with soap.the top is INGOAT soap
The anticipation of the view from the top is always so exciting, until you realize it was just a false summit.
I shorted the everything bubble in paralell to my buy and hold portfolio. I made 4% in 1 day, a total of €46. I am the next Michael Burry. Whoop Whoop!
So I'm assuming everyone's too busy selling off their portfolios to talk about how the Top Is In
Fear is back, VIX above 15, XIV breaking down. SPY to follow, earnings will be a reality check.
I’m at Schroedinger’s top. I’m not going to check anything until I get statements in July. Right now, I am experiencing both the top and the bottom simultaneously.
Quote from: Wintergreen78 on May 13, 2019, 01:43:29 PMI’m at Schroedinger’s top. I’m not going to check anything until I get statements in July. Right now, I am experiencing both the top and the bottom simultaneously.69?
Quote from: Dabnasty on May 13, 2019, 02:27:19 PMQuote from: Wintergreen78 on May 13, 2019, 01:43:29 PMI’m at Schroedinger’s top. I’m not going to check anything until I get statements in July. Right now, I am experiencing both the top and the bottom simultaneously.69?Ah, a physics joke and a sex joke as a reply.. Awesome..:)
Saturday my 7-day annualized loss was about 75%, so I missed the top and am panicking since it's going to be worse after the NAVs update today.Oh wait no I'm not because I have long term AA plans and expect this kind of thing occasionally and will stuff my normal portion into my next paycheck as scheduled no matter where the market is then.
As JL.Collins pointed out referring to a study done by Fidelity. The investors that had made the best returns over time.. They were dead! Literally..:)Moral of the story?.. Don't do anything, except keep investing if you have a pulse!
Quote from: Exflyboy on May 13, 2019, 05:12:28 PMAs JL.Collins pointed out referring to a study done by Fidelity. The investors that had made the best returns over time.. They were dead! Literally..:)Moral of the story?.. Don't do anything, except keep investing if you have a pulse!Yeah, that whole thing about the Fidelity study was made up. It never really happened.
Pretty sure this is also published in A Random Walk Down Wall Street, at least the most recent edition.
Keeping up with this thread is about my only indication of whether the market is fluctuating up or down at the moment.
Quote from: SubL stache on May 13, 2019, 07:36:19 PMPretty sure this is also published in A Random Walk Down Wall Street, at least the most recent edition.Then I guess they also published something that didn't happen."Fidelity, which has received inquiries about the study ever since, without knowing why, told me this week that it had never produced such a study."http://financialuproar.com/2016/08/30/remember-fidelity-study-said-dead-investors-best/https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/06/your-money/401k-retirement-plan-investment-stock-markets.html
This should be an entry as a part of a "Finance Myths" wiki, right below "thorstach said the top was in on April 11, 2017 at 8:26 AM"
Quote from: hadabeardonce on May 14, 2019, 10:35:35 AMThis should be an entry as a part of a "Finance Myths" wiki, right below "thorstach said the top was in on April 11, 2017 at 8:26 AM"Not even touching your disparagement of thorstach, but it is a verifiable fact that he said the top was in at that date and time.
Quote from: merula on May 14, 2019, 11:12:30 AMQuote from: hadabeardonce on May 14, 2019, 10:35:35 AMThis should be an entry as a part of a "Finance Myths" wiki, right below "thorstach said the top was in on April 11, 2017 at 8:26 AM"Not even touching your disparagement of thorstach, but it is a verifiable fact that he said the top was in at that date and time.Fake news! Fake top!
Quote from: dragoncar on May 14, 2019, 12:25:18 PMQuote from: merula on May 14, 2019, 11:12:30 AMQuote from: hadabeardonce on May 14, 2019, 10:35:35 AMThis should be an entry as a part of a "Finance Myths" wiki, right below "thorstach said the top was in on April 11, 2017 at 8:26 AM"Not even touching your disparagement of thorstach, but it is a verifiable fact that he said the top was in at that date and time.Fake news! Fake top!No! Heretic! Fake news, REAL top!Top is in!
What does it even mean for the top to be in? I think we may not be comprehending the full metaphysical nature of Thorstach’s teaching. This myopic focus on numbers and charts is narrowing our thinking too much.I for one will lock myself in a dark room and meditate on the nature of the eternal top.
Quote from: Wintergreen78 on May 14, 2019, 04:24:44 PMWhat does it even mean for the top to be in? I think we may not be comprehending the full metaphysical nature of Thorstach’s teaching. This myopic focus on numbers and charts is narrowing our thinking too much.I for one will lock myself in a dark room and meditate on the nature of the eternal top.Someone beat you to it - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUgs2O7Okqc- Hunter S. Thompson
Why limit ourselves to earth we have a whole universe to find the top of. Universal Top is in!
Quote from: techwiz on May 15, 2019, 11:25:38 AMWhy limit ourselves to earth we have a whole universe to find the top of. Universal Top is in! Ah, but “top” is so arbitrary! It’s not like there is a fixed coordinate system inherent in the universe. I shall simply define mine differently than yours so that your top is now my bottom so I can carry on investing.
Maybe we should build a toppist monastery devoted to meditating on the true nature of the top.
I’ve decided to only define my tops in non-inertial reference frames. Even the position of the top and the bottom within the frame is no longer fixed.
Quote from: Wintergreen78 on May 15, 2019, 11:49:51 AMI’ve decided to only define my tops in non-inertial reference frames. Even the position of the top and the bottom within the frame is no longer fixed.Non-inertial reference frames are for simpletons who believe in momentum; I've decided to only define my tops in relativistic reference frames. Time is an illusion and length is a function of your velocity. Eventually, all tops will succumb to space-time inversions and be physically unable to share information with the rest of the universe, making them irrelevant. Entropic expansion is forever. The top is never in.
Quote from: sol on May 15, 2019, 12:57:41 PMQuote from: Wintergreen78 on May 15, 2019, 11:49:51 AMI’ve decided to only define my tops in non-inertial reference frames. Even the position of the top and the bottom within the frame is no longer fixed.Non-inertial reference frames are for simpletons who believe in momentum; I've decided to only define my tops in relativistic reference frames. Time is an illusion and length is a function of your velocity. Eventually, all tops will succumb to space-time inversions and be physically unable to share information with the rest of the universe, making them irrelevant. Entropic expansion is forever. The top is never in.I tried a relativistic frame once. The math was too hard for me so I decided I would need to change my assumptions.
Quote from: Wintergreen78 on May 15, 2019, 02:07:44 PMQuote from: sol on May 15, 2019, 12:57:41 PMQuote from: Wintergreen78 on May 15, 2019, 11:49:51 AMI’ve decided to only define my tops in non-inertial reference frames. Even the position of the top and the bottom within the frame is no longer fixed.Non-inertial reference frames are for simpletons who believe in momentum; I've decided to only define my tops in relativistic reference frames. Time is an illusion and length is a function of your velocity. Eventually, all tops will succumb to space-time inversions and be physically unable to share information with the rest of the universe, making them irrelevant. Entropic expansion is forever. The top is never in.I tried a relativistic frame once. The math was too hard for me so I decided I would need to change my assumptions.Come now, do you really expect me to do coordinate substitution in my head while strapped to a centrifuge?
Quote from: dragoncar on May 15, 2019, 02:57:25 PMQuote from: Wintergreen78 on May 15, 2019, 02:07:44 PMQuote from: sol on May 15, 2019, 12:57:41 PMQuote from: Wintergreen78 on May 15, 2019, 11:49:51 AMI’ve decided to only define my tops in non-inertial reference frames. Even the position of the top and the bottom within the frame is no longer fixed.Non-inertial reference frames are for simpletons who believe in momentum; I've decided to only define my tops in relativistic reference frames. Time is an illusion and length is a function of your velocity. Eventually, all tops will succumb to space-time inversions and be physically unable to share information with the rest of the universe, making them irrelevant. Entropic expansion is forever. The top is never in.I tried a relativistic frame once. The math was too hard for me so I decided I would need to change my assumptions.Come now, do you really expect me to do coordinate substitution in my head while strapped to a centrifuge?No, dragoncar. I expect you to die.