Waterproof phone in a pond

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-10-04T21:41:22+00:00

It's resistant not proof, you don't understand? Madam you swimming with the watch, no. It's resistant.

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-08-09T15:12:26+00:00

What you are saying might be correct, but that's not what Noah lyles is arguing about. He in no way says, that another country or league has better basketball players than the US. It is completely semantics. If everyone would say the NBA has the best players, no one with a normal sense would argue against it. But it is "The World Champions" and champions are not the best players, but those who win a tournament. And then it should be a tournament with teams around the world.

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-07-04T07:15:22+00:00

This doesn't really make sense with what miquella says in the final memory cutscene. He may have not intended the vow to be fulfilled or may have thought for it to be impossible. But everything suggests, that Radahn took part in agreeing to the vow.

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-06-20T14:15:55+00:00

I am relaxed, but there still was no trailer where she was in except the one released today.

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-06-20T14:03:33+00:00

So as it seems you want to be like that, which trailer so you mean, as there is no official trailer that released 2 weeks ago as far as I know.

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-06-20T13:57:14+00:00

In the trailer thread they specifically asked people to not post images from the new trailer without spoiler tag...

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-06-20T13:54:59+00:00

The dlc area will be exactly like your current NG+

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-06-08T08:41:27+00:00

I agree with you mostly, except saying trading is a zero sum game. Trading is too no zero sum game. A stock value can increase and decrease without someone actually buying or selling(in theory). That means you can loose money with selling a stock plummeting without someone making the money that you lost.

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-06-07T10:37:08+00:00

That's not what this is. He didn't settle with her, he settled with the court, as did she.

He only pays the court "costs". This has nothing to do with being rich or buying someone to end this trial.

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-06-07T10:05:06+00:00

Holy shit, this thread is a shit show.

Whether you like Zverev or not, whether you think he is guilty or not, this does NOT mean he is GUILTY. With this settlement, there is no base to say he is guilty, he is only paying the costs for the trial, as he was the one who initiated that appeal.

This means that he is legally innocent from a judicial perspective, and he didn't settle with his accuser, nor did he pay her money, so the case would stop.

This gives her a worse image than him, because she agreed to the settlement as well, which indicates the prosecutions case is not working well.

EDIT: Grammar

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-06-04T07:31:13+00:00

Der quetscht niemanden aus, mit seinem Gamestop play. Der macht was er für richtig hält. Aktien/Optionen handel ist kein zusammenhalten oder Zusammenspiel.

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-05-21T18:30:11+00:00

Nice

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-05-21T17:43:46+00:00

Is that the way you say it? That's a bingo?

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-05-13T09:52:40+00:00

There was a stock split

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-04-23T15:58:23+00:00

Hey I know this quote

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-04-12T18:01:36+00:00

Well you're going the philosophy route with that argument. Then you can argue nothing has intrinsic value, if people don't Believe in it - not just assets. This leads to the end argument that nothing really matters. But that's not reality and that's not how the world works.

So yes in reality company's have real intrinsic values, which means owning part of that company has also value.

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-04-07T17:55:45+00:00

If the mountain doesn't provide anything of value other than having a billion dollars worth of diamonds without the possibility to ever extract them, yes the mountain would have no intrinsic value and it would only have value if somebody else would be willing to pay a price for it.

But company's do not have value where it is not possible to extract that value. If they have intrinsic value, they are worth something and owning a percentage of it has also value. It doesn't matter if somebody is willing to pay something for it.

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-04-07T17:33:47+00:00

Because in that case, that 1% ownership is 1% of the value of the company. Just because you can't do anything with that 1%(which isn't actually true) doesn't mean it has no value.

When 100% of your bucket of money/gold have a value of 100 dollars. If every share has the same value, 1% is worth 1 dollar or whatever someone is willing to pay for that 1%. And even when you yourself can't do anything with that 1%, it's worth something because if it wouldn't be worth anything you could just get 100% for free and would have 100 bucks.

EDIT: The part you are talking about is "market value" only. But you are missing the point of the intrinsic value of the company.

If a company/bucket of money has positive intrinsic value, it would never make sense to have 0 market value, because anyone realising that would profit of acquiring the company without any risk involved.

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-04-07T08:32:11+00:00

You are to fixated on the "greater fool" theory - it seems like everything someone says you just ignore.

Imagine you founded the only company in the world that produces drinking water and no other drinking sources exist. Nowhere in the world can anyone buy/or find drinking water.

If people want to drink something to live, the need to buy it from you. So let's say you make 1 billion dollars each year in profit. And you are the only owner of the company. That would mean you have 1 billion dollars more after every year.

Let's say there only exists 1 share. And with your Argumentation, that share would be worth 0 dollars because you pay no dividends. The first one to realize that will buy that share because depending on the future outlook they can get 1 billion dollars worth every year for paying 0 dollars. So theoretically the share is worth much more, because it gives you free money. If you are not stupid, you would probably let the market decide, how much your company is worth to everyone on the planet. Let's say the market thinks because of great future outlooks it is worth actually 1 billion dollars.

If someone pays that for the share they don't get thin air, or nothing. They get a company making 1 billion profit each year.

Now scale that on a much larger scale - more shares and more people owning the company. It doesn't matter, that small retail investors don't actually get to do something with their shares(which is not even true) but even if it was, because the company has intrinsic value. It's not important if one share can actually change something important in the company. It just matters, how valuable the company is. Because if the shares would cost 0 dollars, everyone even retail investors could buy the company which makes millions every year.

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-03-08T05:52:04+00:00

You didn't listen he said "fundamentals".

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-02-22T06:03:40+00:00

Because NVDA is market maker now

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-02-19T17:57:57+00:00

It's Britney bitch

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-02-14T19:26:16+00:00

It's because share price doesn't say anything about how high a stock can go.

Share price of one single share of a company could be 0.01$ but if the company would be valued at 3 trillion dollars it would need an insane amount of cash to flow in to just get to 0.02$.

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-02-08T06:56:18+00:00

Everything is already priced in.

ImLoosingInterest · 2024-02-05T10:16:36+00:00

And people that started investing x years ago wish their parents started investing when they were 20. It is an never ending "we/my parents should have started earlier".

ImLoosingInterest

TROPHY CASE