@spnewbie post number 41598910 at 24/11/19 11:14
Youasked for advice.Here is some. As a start, unless you are interested in just gambling, read books by Warren Buffet, Graham's The Intelligent Investor or books about Warren Buffet. Buffet says:
1. Investors Golden rule:
"(a) Concentrate your investments in outstanding companies run by strong management.
(b) Limit yourself to the number of companies you can truly understand, 10 to 20 is good, more than twenty is asking for trouble.
(c) Pick the best of your good companies and put the bulk of your investment there.
(d) Think long term: five to ten years, minimum.
(e) Volatility happens. Carry on."
"If you have a harem of 40 women, you never get to know any of them very well"
"I buy businesses, not stocks, businesses I would be willing to own forever."
" I can't be involved in 50 or 75 things. That's a Noah's Ark way of investing - you end up with a zoo that way. I like to put meaningful amounts of money in a few things."
2. Concerning the press, Buffet says:
"The tough part about it is that essentially there is no one, virtually with the exception of an assassin, that can do you as much damage as somebody can in the press, if they do something the wrong way. There may be doctors out there who can do you just as much harm, but in that case, you initiate the transaction."
3. About the timing or buying stocks:
"Most people get interested in stocks when everyone else is. The time to get interested is when no one else is. You can't buy what is popular and do well"
"You don't need to be a rocket scientist. Investing is not a game where the guy with the 160 IQ beats the guy with a 130 IQ. Rationality thinking is essential."
"Noah didn't start building the ark after it had started raining."
4. Look for unusual circumstances
"Great investment opportunities come around when excellent companies are surrounded by unusual circumstances that cause the stock to be misappraised"
"It's only when the tide goes out that you learn who's been swimming naked."
5. About asking "the professionals" for advice,
"Never ask the barber if you need a haircut."
"Wall Street is the only place that people ride to in a Rolls Royce to get advice from those who take the subway."
6. About the price
"It's better to buy a wonderful company at a fair price than a fair company at a wonderful price."
"All we want is to be in businesses that we understand, run by people whom we like, and priced attractively relative to their future prospects."
My advise, read all posts on HotCopper with a good deal of scepticism. Try to understand the bias of the writer.
Those of us who say we are investors - position held, buy or hold, consider we are just that. Consider the quality of the facts produced, "trust and verify", and look at the quality of the posts and determine for yourself whether we understand the company and how much bias exists just because we own a bit of the company.
Those investors who declare "Held" "Sell", or are unwilling to declare their bias and can provide a reasoned, substantiated argument - "trust and verify"
Those, however, who have scathing, unsubstantiated posts, use ASX questions as proof of ISX guilt and who obviously show a refusal to read, understand or consider a well thought out argument contradicting their view - and who keep going on, and on, and on, and on.... - be extremely critical.
Consider what their bias might be:
1. An investment adviser who may have just put millions of their clients money into "shorts" and will lose millions of their clients money if the stock, when it is taken off suspension, continues to go up and does not crash. Likely result - the adviser will lose customers or worse, be out of a job.
2. A shorter, who stands to lose his/her own money,
3. Part of the press, who really doesn't want to be disclosed for the corrupt reporting that he/she has been doing,
4. Part of Ownership Matters who really is trying to save their reputation and business,
5. The competition, who just wants ISX discredited and out of their way.
Posters that exist in the above 5 categories should be held with the highest contempt because they are attempting to influence the market, not due to facts but entirely for personal gain. And I think that just might be illegal.
And we all know who they are. I will only respond to their posts, if I think it will give the broader audience some insight - but not because I think that he/she actually will read and consider it, because that has become obvious. He or she does not.
