This is why I keep saying Ched needs to put stock market 2.0 under casino 3.0. It's all RNG, no returns on RL actions. There's no supply to indicate demand. When you have endless stocks that can be bought, there is no reason for the price to do anything but stay stable or decline.
Some of Ched's changes are annoying, but this one to stocks was flat out stupid.
This is probably true, in the very short term. It hasn't been around long enough to see long term effects.
But seriously, I have done maybe like 8-14 investments so far around that 7-10b investment range, and 1 bigger investment. Every time, the price has gone down almost immediately after. Now, some of them seem to recover to breakeven point within a few days. But, some of them don't and stay under buy in price. And, of course, some go up about breakeven and back down and back up and all around. So yeah I can't make any sense of any of it all yet, except that price definitely goes down pretty much immediately after a larger buy in.
It really is more of a casino game at this point. BUT, at least we don't lose everything on an L like with other casino games. AND, we have potential to gain some smaller amounts (compared to before). I don't think anyone is going to be flipping 300b investments for 50b profit in this system, but I don't know. One could potentially flip a 300b over and over and over again and potentially earn that 50b, but would take some massive luck and lots of daily or weekly trading activity. I guess we'll see what those with super high investments amounts conclude after some time. (I don't include myself in that as much, because I tend to stick to the 10b-50b range in most cases, not the 100b+ stuff.)
From what I have seen in the few weeks of the system so far, it seems to be smarter play, if investing a big dollar amount for the purpose of resale for profit, to invest into something with an active benefit that scales with the investment. Seems like a pretty horrible idea to go heavy into one of the passive stock benefits that don't provide further benefit for higher investment. At least, with the active benefits, you can gain a little extra in dividends, if you decide to hold the stock while it is at a loss in the portfolio.
How do you think that's gonna do, both short and long term?
Looks like you invested at the RL top.
Unless you have a reason to believe otherwise, I’d put the odds on Ched using live data is probably about 0%. It would mean he has had absolutely no control over how stock prices will trend over the long run.
This avoids potential headaches for him around companies going bust/being acquired and no longer existing, indexes being discontinued, ETFs being closed etc.
Far more likely is that Ched has taken a period in history which is then a “controlled” source, which he can be certain that long term annual growth rates will be 10%, and that companies won’t either 0 out or go sky high.
Plus, the chart you posted looks nothing like CNC except for the fact that there is a downtrend since where your cursor is pointing! Show me a regression slope and a statistically significant t value and I’ll happily stand corrected :P