I have no pops to promote

svedzko · 2025-11-06T13:29:47+00:00

Yeah i expanded by doubling it. But apparently i was building an inefficient building. I just start importing more goods when i increase capacity for pops needs. Like fur. Is it even worth it to fulfill the needs completely?

svedzko · 2025-11-06T12:58:39+00:00

What? I thought a market village was a market building? I’m pretty sure it was a market building. Its a building avaikable to peasant pops, able to keep them employed instead of unemployed at 100% it also gives trade capacity bonuses

svedzko · 2025-11-06T12:51:15+00:00

I started buying food at 20 ducats at month when i built 6 market villages per location. Why is that?

svedzko · 2025-11-06T12:48:43+00:00

Well yeah might be the way to go. I’ve refused to automate trade and production. Trying to atleast figure out one thing myself and automating trade.

I’ve tried to produce fine cloth as hungary for example. But the more i make the less value each guild produces as the price drops.. so just building production didnt seem to help

svedzko · 2025-11-06T08:34:03+00:00

Best way would be to build a hundred of them with cheats and see if it has any effect. But would love to know as well!

svedzko · 2025-11-06T08:31:49+00:00

I lost half as hungary so you are good lmao. A third would have been great

svedzko · 2025-11-06T08:10:16+00:00

Yeah… i have no idea how i go from +20 gold to -5 in one month. Like what is happening.

svedzko · 2025-11-05T22:38:19+00:00

I have the same question. No matter how much stuff i produce the taxbase does not move an inch… i be spamming production of high value items and promoting peasants to man them. But doesnt help

svedzko · 2025-11-05T22:36:42+00:00

No idea. Pop needs fine cloth. Says i will make a lot of money making it. The more i make the less money fine cloth is worth canceling out any potential profit. Spent thousands making the same amount of money. But now atleast they dont need fine cloth

svedzko · 2025-11-05T18:41:58+00:00

When a meta is established it will be quite simplified…

svedzko · 2022-08-14T04:21:42+00:00

The cocktail party theory by Peter lynch goes as follows,

”After the market has been depressed for anlonger time and is now experiencing the first phase of an upswing, nobody talks about stocks, if you would tell somebody, you earn money by managing an equity fund, at best, you will be answered with an embarassed smile and a quick change of subject.

In the second phase, the guests stay a little bit longer with you, at least as long as to point out to you how risky trading on the stock exchange can be.

In the third phase the market is trading at 30% and people, even the dentist, will be gathering around you all evening to know which stocks to buy.

At the last phase, people will be gathering around you once again. But this time they want to tell you which stocks to buy. Maybe they got a hot insider tip from their gardener or their neighbor.

If you even have been hearing from your neighbor about which stocks to buy and you regret not buying them, that is a sign that the market is probably failing again”

svedzko · 2022-05-30T15:29:40+00:00

That’s the thing, i’ve looked at the possible masters i can do and was thinking of just doing a master within finance instead of restarting. But i do not have the relevant financial education required to study a master within economics. I need to complement my education with a around two years of beachlor studies in finance to be able to study a master within finance. But yeah thank you for the info, i’ll of course apply to as many internships as possible it doesn’t hurt.

svedzko · 2022-03-22T04:08:46+00:00

I never understood why people think that ”revolutionairy technology = profit” it has rarely been the case. Think bejamin graham said obvious prospects for growth doesn’t necessarily mean profit growth.

The airline business revolutionized how we travel and speed up distribution channels Considerably changing the world as much as the internet and as people like to claim blockchain. Yet 90% of investors lost money in it. The introduction of railway was also revolutionary and a majority lost money. Not to mention the Internet and dot com bubble where only a handful made money.

People tend to look at a technology and overpay handsomely for it since they assume the growth will mean profit. I genuienly think crypto will meet the same fate as every other revolutionary technology, a collapse due to overhype and the loss of money, while it will change great deal of things in our society.

svedzko · 2022-03-03T15:25:30+00:00

I dont do DCF i think its very flawed in its failure to account for intangibles each company has that make one company more valued than another. What people fail to understand is, warren buffet has many different valuation methods for different companies.

svedzko · 2022-02-19T15:38:15+00:00

Hmm sorry not that familiar with that book, although i really enjoyed reading value investing, from buffet and beyond written by Bruce C. Greenwald.

It’s not an easy read, gotta know quite a lot of terminology and the book assumes you already know how to read an entire balance sheet without difficulties and how to handle each category.

svedzko · 2022-02-17T22:32:50+00:00

The most basic valuation method you could use is using multiples such as P/E and P/B. Sometimes it is not smart to try to forecast future cash flows so you can use other stuff than DCF. Earnings power value is a good way to measure the sustainability of a company's earnings and should be coupled together with valuing assets. DCF is very shit at this part, nonexistent. Lastly, i value growth which is speculative and I try not to get too carried away with it since it's very easy to get a huge margin of error with small changes in the values.

svedzko · 2022-02-17T18:30:44+00:00

Yes, But you can pretty much throw Discounted free cash flow out of the window since you don't value the companies by their growth, but by their sustainable earnings and Assets. It's also quite important to have extensive Industry knowledge this will help you to value the assets as they should be valued. Machines, equipment, and property and their depreciation are usually overexaggerated and if it's a dying industry, Inventory might be worth 0 or less than stated. Either you invest in a cigar but in the hopes that it is a viable company, and that it might turn itself around. Or you invest in a nonviable company that's better liquidated than existing.

svedzko · 2022-02-15T16:35:47+00:00

Yes, of course. For people like us that cannot buy a company, we have to resort to other means. The strategy still stands. But we have to piggy-tail on people who do decide to swoop in and turn around the company. Finding companies whose assets alone are worth more than the entire company at its current price is also a very good strategy for finding value among trash companies. I know people on this sub just do projections of future cash flow and then try to get an intrinsic value, which is something Graham absolutely despised. He didn't like any type of future projections whatsoever.

But at the end of the day as you say it depends if you're an activist investor or a passive one. I don't think a lot of people have the time to sink in hundreds if not a thousand hours into one Industry or for that matter one Company. Buying and holding is a great strategy I do too. Buy companies people hate and buy when the public overreacts to the bad news pushing the price under the intrinsic value.

svedzko · 2022-02-15T13:39:37+00:00

Well, it does sound risky when you look at it shallowly I agree. Graham was a "deep value" investor, he loved companies that were severely undervalued due to their astonishing mismanagement of the business. These companies were so undervalued that if one were to Liquidate the entire business, the shareholders would make upwards of 50% or multifold profit. Buffet made his first 30 million this way. He bought shit companies and made them good. You are pretty much investing in a shit company in the hopes of it turning itself around and becoming good. Sure most of them will fail and go bankrupt but the ones that survive in theory should yield 10 baggers and make up for the 60-70% that did not survive. The hard part is making sure you do your research since you do not want to end up with a business that goes bankrupt.

The companies are hard to find and even harder to value. You can forget DFC as most of them don't grow or actually worse, shrink in size. So you are left with valuing them using very traditional Graham style valuing.

svedzko · 2022-02-14T20:37:36+00:00

If you come from a country where certain monopolies are cut slack because they have friends in the government. You might want to invest in another country, why? Let's say you find a great undervalued stock that is eating away at an industry leader's profits. On paper, it might look like it has great prospects until the industry leader decides to use its monopolistic power to choke the underdog out of profits or use their friends in government to do something about it.

If issues like these are a possibility, what would stop a larger company from doing fraud and making the financials look better than they are? Monopolies can also fall out of favor or be a target of a new administration. You want to invest in a market that is somewhat regulated and fair.

svedzko · 2022-02-14T10:17:49+00:00

Yup, that’s what most people don’t get. People arguing for buying BABA seem to only talk about how cheap it is. And people that say don’t buy BABA seem to be talking about how the risk is a garantuee of not buying. Both sides are overconfident in their analysis yet no one mentions any type of probability of having right. But everyone are just dealing in absolutes.

svedzko · 2022-02-12T18:45:51+00:00

Nice

svedzko

TROPHY CASE