3 ms·
> When the NYT starts talking about it you know the structure of the bubble is weak. The NYT (together with all media) has been saying there's a bubble for yea
by morgante 10y ago
> When the NYT starts talking about it you know the structure of the bubble is weak.
The NYT (together with all media) has been saying there's a bubble for years. They've written nearly 200 articles about this bubble between 2008 and 2015.
For example: http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2010/12/03/a-silicon-bubble-shows-signs-of-reinflating/ http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2010/12/03/a-silicon-bubble-show...
There will always be naysayers. Plenty of people thought the notion of Facebook being worth even $50bn was ludicrous.
Bubbles exist, but so does growth. It's all but impossible to differentiate the two until after the fact.
That being said, we probably are in something of a bubble.
- cardiffspaceman 10y agoI always say that the crash comes after the last skeptic buys in. I honestly don't have any anecdotes to specifically back that up, but plenty of people at cocktail parties have nodded in agreement.
- thaumasiotes 10y agoThis would immediately imply that no one ever gets rich shorting the crash.
- cardiffspaceman 10y agoBecause no skeptics would be short when the crash came.
- ktRolster 10y agoBut of course, some people do make money in the crashes. John Paulson made billions in the 2008 crash. Mark Cuban at least forsaw the .com bomb.