logoSign upLog in
  1. ProducerJarl Frijs-Madsen
    Why America will be winning with or without Trump
    Why America will be winning with or without TrumpIt has been said that the 19th century belonged to Europe, the 20th  century belonged to America and the 21st century will belong to Asia. There is a lot of truth in this, as economic and political power will continue to move from West – especially...


    Dean Owen
    30/07/2016 #2 Dean Owen
    In a Financial Times article I think back in 2012, I predicted Shanghai would overtake London as a Financial centre by 2020. I stand by that prediction too.
    Dean Owen
    30/07/2016 #1 Dean Owen
    Agree on all points except perhaps the 2050 prediction. If you look at all the top schools in the US, you'll see Asian faces in unprecedented numbers. They rely on Asia students for a bulk of their funding (I have been approached numerous times by US colleges to act as a consultant to increase enrolment of Chinese students). China overtook Japan as the second largest economy just 2 years after the Beijing Olympics and Shanghai Expo heralded China's arrival on the World stage. Back then,there were only a handful of Chinese studying abroad. The next generation of Chinese business leaders will be US college educated, and I have no doubt that China will be the largest economy in the World by 2035. Great buzz. You clearly know what is going on.
  2. ProducerGert Scholtz

    Gert Scholtz

    Framing the Frame
    Framing the FrameJim Murray took my original clanky post on Framing, and reworked it to his flowing and superb style of narrative. Thank you Jim. Here is the reworked version: Behavioral economics is the study of decision making in an economic and...


    Rick Delmonico
    11/07/2016 #26 Rick Delmonico
    George Carlin would say "the glass is twice as big as it needs to be."
    Dean Owen
    11/07/2016 #25 Dean Owen
    I have to be honest, the original version has a better flow.
    Milos Djukic
    09/07/2016 #24 Anonymous
    You are welcome @Gert Scholtz and yes @Jim Murray is a really good.
    Gert Scholtz
    09/07/2016 #23 Gert Scholtz
    @Javier beBee @Irene Hackett @CityVP Manjit @Milos Djukic @Kevin Pashuk @Dean Owen @Sara Jacobovici Thank you for the shares on my post - now as edited by @Jim Murray. Thank you Jim!
    Gert Scholtz
    08/07/2016 #22 Gert Scholtz
    #21 @Phil Friedman Thank you for your detailed comments Phil. The way I look at it: The intrinsic value of a share, as based on asset value of the company and / or expected future cash flows, is a constant at the time of a share split and it would be illogical to ascribe a higher value based only on the intrinsic value at the time of the share split. However, a share split does result in the share being more tradeable and more liquid, and this may well result in an increase in perceived value. So yes, the reference in the article is not totally correct. Thanks for reading and have a great day!
    Phil Friedman
    07/07/2016 #21 Phil Friedman
    @Gert Scholtz, to my mind, this is a major problem in the behavioral sciences, including empirical economics. Namely, very simple rational analysis is often overlooked. To wit, you say, "In the most common form of share split, one share is replaced by two, each with halve the value of the original share, yet together still the same value. For example a share of $80 would split into two shares of $40 each. Often there is a perception of increased value created when companies split their shares. Yahoo announced their share split and the share price surged 16% the next day." There is nothing surprising or noteworthy about this. The mistake being made is in ASSUMING that the perceived value of a stock in as a share of something real, for example, the assets of the company. The fact is that nowadays the stock market is nothing more nor less than a parimutuel betting window. When a stock is split, everyone PERCEIVES that the total value of each pair of resulting shares is greater than the immediately prior value of a single pre-split share, NOT because they think the inherent value of the share has increased, but because they expect that post-split the shares will almost immediately begin to appreciate -- which is born out by the Yahoo example you give. That the author you refer to is simply mistaken when he implies that the perceived of the split shares accrue to the shares, when in fact, it accrues to the perceived greater potential for short term appreciation. Otherwise some good points covered and made. Nice piece, Thank you for sharing. Cheers!
    Sara Jacobovici
    07/07/2016 #20 Sara Jacobovici
    Thanks gentlemen (just in case you don't know who you are, I am referring to @Gert Scholtz, @Ken Boddie and @Kevin Pashuk) for making me smile a few times. I've never smiled and scrolled up at the same time before.
    Kevin Pashuk
    07/07/2016 #19 Kevin Pashuk
    #18 OK... you win with that one @Gert Scholtz
    Gert Scholtz
    07/07/2016 #18 Gert Scholtz
    @Ken Boddie @Kevin Pashuk The psychologist says to the glass: tell me how you feel about the engineer :)
    Kevin Pashuk
    07/07/2016 #17 Kevin Pashuk
    #16 and the opportunist takes the glass and drinks the contents while the other three are arguing.
    Ken Boddie
    07/07/2016 #16 Ken Boddie
    OK @Gert Scholtz and @Kevin Pashuk, since we're on the subjects of psychology, marketing and engineers, let's look at how we can psycho-analyse a glass of water.
    The optimist says it's half full, the pessimist says it's half empty, and the engineer says it's twice the size for which it should have been designed. 🤓
    Kevin Pashuk
    07/07/2016 #15 Kevin Pashuk
    #13 Pyscho engineers @Ken Boddie? Never met one... although a few have tried to pass themselves off as civil...
    Gert Scholtz
    07/07/2016 #14 Gert Scholtz
    @Ken Boddie @Irene Hackett So even engineers have a marketing side! And they play mind games as Irene said? NO! :) Thank Ken for the extra "angle" on the buzz. Thanks for reading and commenting Irene.
    Ken Boddie
    07/07/2016 #13 Ken Boddie
    Interesting 'psychonomical' precis, @Gert Scholtz. Engineers have been designing road pavements on a similar principle for decades. Pavements, for example, all fail, due to repeat loading and associated material fatigue or differential strain accumulation. This is unfortunately inevitable and all pavements have a finite life, estimated as part of the design process, after which they will require some form of remediation or reconstruction. This concept is invariably sold positively, whereby designing on a 95 percentile basis (rather than say 90 percentile or 80 percentile) is most often described as a 95% chance of exceeding the estimated design life, rather than a 5% chance that failure will occur before the anticipated design life. Perhaps this might also explain why there are so many psycho engineers running around out there? 😰
    Irene Hackett
    07/07/2016 #12 Anonymous
    @Gert Scholtz - yes, much like all human behavior, our personal finance decions are about perception - it's why the field of marketing exists- it's a mind game! Thanks for the interesting buzz!
    Gert Scholtz
    07/07/2016 #11 Gert Scholtz
    @Dean Owen Thank you Dean. Always good to have your comments and shares my friend!
    Brian McKenzie
    07/07/2016 #10 Brian McKenzie
    #9 I specialize in breaking things. I will subvert, overthrow, derail and destroy - just like the enemy will - because I don't play by your 'rules' nor do I abide by the sunny pedantic optimism.... and I have been right on too many counts to be ignored..... One time I helped overthrow South Korea in a war game...... because that is what the enemy would do...... there were more than a few pissed off and embarrassed O-5's and O-6's on that one. (Luckily the Admiral loved it)
    Gert Scholtz
    07/07/2016 #9 Gert Scholtz
    #4 Thanks for reading and commenting Brian. Spotting the upside in the downside sums up your approach?
    Gert Scholtz
    07/07/2016 #8 Gert Scholtz
    @Savvy Raj Thank you Savvy - I like your phrase: fodder for thought.
    Sara Jacobovici
    07/07/2016 #7 Sara Jacobovici
    @Gert Scholtz makes a lot of sense here. An important read.
  3. Netta Virtanen

    Netta Virtanen

    Netta Virtanen
    The Most Expensive Cities in the World to Live
    blogs.wsj.com A stronger dollar has propelled New York and Los Angeles into an annual ranking of the world’s 10 most expensive...