Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Investing in the stock market - Discussion


Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, nuckin_futz said:

WKHS getting butchered. I guess if you're going to lose a contract the United States Postal Service is the wrong one to lose.

I am shocked that company that has no sales and multi billion evaluation is tanking.

Never kind, it’s 2021 most of these stocks are trading on their potential earnings in year 2050.

Carry on, silly me!

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Down by the River said:

Added to my position in SBE. About 80% of my portfolio is wrapped up in ARKK/ARKQ/ARKF. 

Just my opinion. In the next 2 years there's a 50% chance Cathie blows up.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, CBH1926 said:

Nope

 

3 minutes ago, nuckin_futz said:

:sadno:

Well then, I'll steer clear of that. I appreciate the information here, folks. Being new to the market and investing, coming here is educational.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, NucksPatsFan said:

Curious to hear your thoughts on it being a 1 in 2 chance the ARK etf's dwindle to nothing in 24 months.

Blowing up does not equate to dwindling to nothing.

 

IMO this is a market that is fresh out of good original ideas. First of all repeatedly plowing into the same 5 or 6 stocks. Then the SPAC craze. There's too many of them chasing too few opportunities. It's going to end badly for the majority of them. You know it's a mania when Kaepernick is forming a SPAC to focus on Social Justice. Greedy bastards like A-Rod pimping his SPAC, etc. Then the short busting game. Yeah it was fun watching GME levitate but that quickly ended in tears. Then this crazy idea to teach Jamie Dimon a lesson by running silver. Then of course everyone blindly chucking money at Cathie because she's buying speculative names during a raging bull market fueled by an irresponsible Fed.

 

Cathie Wood has become a victim of her own success. The amount of dough flowing into her funds is simply obscene. It's literally off the chart. It's not like she can go plow it into WMT or BAC etc. She has a limited universe in which to allocate these funds. Which puts her in a precarious position. I think she already owns 10% of at least 24 companies. Where do you go from there? Where do you allocate the existing capital not to mention all the capital that continues to flow in? Today she was in the market loading up on TSLA. That doesn't seem like a wise thing to do to me but what choice does she have?

 

Another astonishing thing she does is let her positions be known on a daily basis. What is the benefit in doing that other than to sate one's ego? There is a long history of the market figuring out another entity's positions and driving the market against them. We saw it recently with Melvin Capital. Brian Hunter at Amaranth Advisors is another good example. So Cathie is in speculative names some of which are thinly traded and she's advertising her positions to anyone who will listen. That's just not wise.

 

Eventually this market which is out of good original ideas and flush with cheap money will turn on her. Why? Because she's put herself in a vulnerable position and it's survival of the fittest.

 

She herself has said in a rising rate environment her funds would get hit especially hard. Well we are in a rising rate environment and what has happened to her funds? They have been hit much harder than the Nasdaq. When her performance suffers she'll be hit with redemption requests and have to sell holdings that aren't the most liquid and thus begins the vicious cycle. When that happens the pile on will begin.

 

She's obviously a bright fund manager but I do think a considerable part of her success can be attributed to an environment embracing risk taking driven by cheap money. She's good but she's no Peter Lynch.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Tortorella's Rant said:

I like Hive as well. I wish I bought them for pennies last year. If you aren't necessarily a fan of the cryptos then go for the companies that deal with them. Lack of trading experience and uneasiness about losing money in common stock keeps me from pouring in a little bit here and there to make "a lot" of it. Northland Power was another company I liked a couple years ago I mentioned here - about 20 bucks a pop at the time with a nice dividend. 

buy geothermal energy, the world is going to need a lot of energy by 2030, with all cars being made be electric. some good price points for PIF.to is a small cap profitable company, with a 3.6% dividend pay per share. 17.50 would be a great price point for it, but i FOMO'd at 20$ this morning.

 

 

and ine.to is a high growth company expected to to grow revenues by 75% year after year and become profitable by in 2021 and by 2022 very profitable. 1 year rsi was below twenty today when i bought in, currently at 24. with 2.9% dividend per share

 

Edited by Petey_BOI
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, nuckin_futz said:

Blowing up does not equate to dwindling to nothing.

 

IMO this is a market that is fresh out of good original ideas. First of all repeatedly plowing into the same 5 or 6 stocks. Then the SPAC craze. There's too many of them chasing too few opportunities. It's going to end badly for the majority of them. You know it's a mania when Kaepernick is forming a SPAC to focus on Social Justice. Greedy bastards like A-Rod pimping his SPAC, etc. Then the short busting game. Yeah it was fun watching GME levitate but that quickly ended in tears. Then this crazy idea to teach Jamie Dimon a lesson by running silver. Then of course everyone blindly chucking money at Cathie because she's buying speculative names during a raging bull market fueled by an irresponsible Fed.

 

Cathie Wood has become a victim of her own success. The amount of dough flowing into her funds is simply obscene. It's literally off the chart. It's not like she can go plow it into WMT or BAC etc. She has a limited universe in which to allocate these funds. Which puts her in a precarious position. I think she already owns 10% of at least 24 companies. Where do you go from there? Where do you allocate the existing capital not to mention all the capital that continues to flow in? Today she was in the market loading up on TSLA. That doesn't seem like a wise thing to do to me but what choice does she have?

 

Another astonishing thing she does is let her positions be known on a daily basis. What is the benefit in doing that other than to sate one's ego? There is a long history of the market figuring out another entity's positions and driving the market against them. We saw it recently with Melvin Capital. Brian Hunter at Amaranth Advisors is another good example. So Cathie is in speculative names some of which are thinly traded and she's advertising her positions to anyone who will listen. That's just not wise.

 

Eventually this market which is out of good original ideas and flush with cheap money will turn on her. Why? Because she's put herself in a vulnerable position and it's survival of the fittest.

 

She herself has said in a rising rate environment her funds would get hit especially hard. Well we are in a rising rate environment and what has happened to her funds? They have been hit much harder than the Nasdaq. When her performance suffers she'll be hit with redemption requests and have to sell holdings that aren't the most liquid and thus begins the vicious cycle. When that happens the pile on will begin.

 

She's obviously a bright fund manager but I do think a considerable part of her success can be attributed to an environment embracing risk taking driven by cheap money. She's good but she's no Peter Lynch.

Great post!

She has been buying PLTR like crazy and any time she does, Stocktwits mania takes over.

The other day it went up 15% after all her buying stories but it crashed again after people started posting that she sold some of ARK’s holdings. That’s not the main reason why PLTR went down but lot of people put their money where she does.

 

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, nuckin_futz said:

Blowing up does not equate to dwindling to nothing.

 

IMO this is a market that is fresh out of good original ideas. First of all repeatedly plowing into the same 5 or 6 stocks. Then the SPAC craze. There's too many of them chasing too few opportunities. It's going to end badly for the majority of them. You know it's a mania when Kaepernick is forming a SPAC to focus on Social Justice. Greedy bastards like A-Rod pimping his SPAC, etc. Then the short busting game. Yeah it was fun watching GME levitate but that quickly ended in tears. Then this crazy idea to teach Jamie Dimon a lesson by running silver. Then of course everyone blindly chucking money at Cathie because she's buying speculative names during a raging bull market fueled by an irresponsible Fed.

 

Cathie Wood has become a victim of her own success. The amount of dough flowing into her funds is simply obscene. It's literally off the chart. It's not like she can go plow it into WMT or BAC etc. She has a limited universe in which to allocate these funds. Which puts her in a precarious position. I think she already owns 10% of at least 24 companies. Where do you go from there? Where do you allocate the existing capital not to mention all the capital that continues to flow in? Today she was in the market loading up on TSLA. That doesn't seem like a wise thing to do to me but what choice does she have?

 

Another astonishing thing she does is let her positions be known on a daily basis. What is the benefit in doing that other than to sate one's ego? There is a long history of the market figuring out another entity's positions and driving the market against them. We saw it recently with Melvin Capital. Brian Hunter at Amaranth Advisors is another good example. So Cathie is in speculative names some of which are thinly traded and she's advertising her positions to anyone who will listen. That's just not wise.

 

Eventually this market which is out of good original ideas and flush with cheap money will turn on her. Why? Because she's put herself in a vulnerable position and it's survival of the fittest.

 

She herself has said in a rising rate environment her funds would get hit especially hard. Well we are in a rising rate environment and what has happened to her funds? They have been hit much harder than the Nasdaq. When her performance suffers she'll be hit with redemption requests and have to sell holdings that aren't the most liquid and thus begins the vicious cycle. When that happens the pile on will begin.

 

She's obviously a bright fund manager but I do think a considerable part of her success can be attributed to an environment embracing risk taking driven by cheap money. She's good but she's no Peter Lynch.

Thanks for the insight.

 

A lot of her spec positions make up tiny portions (less than half a percent) of Arkk. When the usps contract news came out and workhorse dropped 60 percent (of which Arkk owns close to 3 mill shares) it barely moved Arkk. The top holdings are relatively strong revenue generating companies poised to continue to grow. Tesla will break 1k in the future. Correct to sub 500? Possibly. But long term I think it breaks 1k. She’s also not afraid to sell. She was selling off Tesla for consecutive days in December and January.

 

I’m only in Arkk, not the individual ones, with a cost basis around $42 so I’m fairly confident moving forward. 

Someone above mentioned Palantir. She was on CNBC the other day and mentioned she sees palantir staying flat or going down in the near term but she’s investing in the long term of the company. 
 

 

I do agree with the point of her posting daily moves as a bad thing. And I do think that will stop in the near future. I don’t know if I see myself investing in any of the individual etf’s but the Arkk one I’m confident in. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CBH1926 said:

Great post!

She has been buying PLTR like crazy and any time she does, Stocktwits mania takes over.

The other day it went up 15% after all her buying stories but it crashed again after people started posting that she sold some of ARK’s holdings. That’s not the main reason why PLTR went down but lot of people put their money where she does.

 

Plowing into big cap tech and thin speculative names is great as long as the wind is at your back. When the market turns it's a Hell all of it's own.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Petey_BOI said:

buy geothermal energy, the world is going to need a lot of energy by 2030, with all cars being made be electric. some good price points for PIF.to is a small cap profitable company, with a 3.6% dividend pay per share. 17.50 would be a great price point for it, but i FOMO'd at 20$ this morning.

 

 

and ine.to is a high growth company expected to to grow revenues by 75% year after year and become profitable by in 2021 and by 2022 very profitable. 1 year rsi was below twenty today when i bought in, currently at 24. with 2.9% dividend per share

 

On that note, there's a lot of talk about canadian companies currently in the EV market and cobalt/lithium development

 

MGX

Summit Nanotech

Electrovaya

 

All very viable.

 

PWM as well for rare earth and pegmatite 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, nuckin_futz said:

Plowing into big cap tech and thin speculative names is great as long as the wind is at your back. When the market turns it's a Hell all of it's own.

read a write up about etf companies that rode high on the winds of the bull market but that their big tests are coming as market uncertainty is almost inevitable due to inescapable inflation

 

Ark-ETF was one of 10 on their list.

 

Essentially the list just said that it was easy to manage an unending supply of optimism and government backed cash powered markets but those who want to be the next buffet better be able to be survivors in what might happen

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, NucksPatsFan said:

Thanks for the insight.

 

A lot of her spec positions make up tiny portions (less than half a percent) of Arkk. When the usps contract news came out and workhorse dropped 60 percent (of which Arkk owns close to 3 mill shares) it barely moved Arkk. The top holdings are relatively strong revenue generating companies poised to continue to grow. Tesla will break 1k in the future. Correct to sub 500? Possibly. But long term I think it breaks 1k. She’s also not afraid to sell. She was selling off Tesla for consecutive days in December and January.

 

I’m only in Arkk, not the individual ones, with a cost basis around $42 so I’m fairly confident moving forward. 

Someone above mentioned Palantir. She was on CNBC the other day and mentioned she sees palantir staying flat or going down in the near term but she’s investing in the long term of the company. 
 

 

I do agree with the point of her posting daily moves as a bad thing. And I do think that will stop in the near future. I don’t know if I see myself investing in any of the individual etf’s but the Arkk one I’m confident in. 

They always say they are long term investors. I remember many years back CNBC would bring people on and look back at their recommendations. The conversation would go something like this "Jimmy, you were on in March, you liked BRCD at $240 it's now at $170. You still like it?" ..... "At Bagholder Asset Management we take a long term approach to the market. We still like it and we've been buying more." ............. A few years later BRCD was sub $5 and they never brought Jimmy on again.

 

Yeah her WKHS position was relatively minor but it's another paper cut. They all add up.

 

 

3 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

lol.  My only plays now are currently CCTL, RLLCF, RYCEY and HCMC

Damn, I thought I played with some of the thin and dirty's. I feel like taking a shower after looking at your watch list. :)

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, nuckin_futz said:

They always say they are long term investors. I remember many years back CNBC would bring people on and look back at their recommendations. The conversation would go something like this "Jimmy, you were on in March, you liked BRCD at $240 it's now at $170. You still like it?" ..... "At Bagholder Asset Management we take a long term approach to the market. We still like it and we've been buying more." ............. A few years later BRCD was sub $5 and they never brought Jimmy on again.

 

Yeah her WKHS position was relatively minor but it's another paper cut. They all add up.

 

 

Damn, I thought I played with some of the thin and dirty's. I feel like taking a shower after looking at your watch list. :)

I have an accumulated $1600 in there.  $400 in each lol.  Honestly ok risking that because I've actually done pretty well thanks to you, Ari and Patsfan

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...