4 ms·

I remember a game circa 1980s called Inside Trader, a stock market "simulation". There were a bunch of fake stocks that fluctuated in value randomly, and one co

I remember a game circa 1980s called Inside Trader, a stock market "simulation". There were a bunch of fake stocks that fluctuated in value randomly, and one could choose to trade honestly or based on tips. Tips carried the risk of penalties and jail (losing the game). I eventually figured out that while the prices did go up and down, they never went below zero. Therefore, one could trivially beat the game by purchasing penny stocks. Unfortunately, the real market does not have a meaningful lower bound on losses.

jrs235 10y ago
I loved that game! I believe my family obtained their copy via a bundle called Top Ten Solid Gold Hits!
- zekevermillion 10y ago
  Yes! That rings a bell. I really miss my old IBM PC. 20MB of drive space and a lot more fun than I've had since, plus it taught me how to make money on penny stocks --har har.
x1798DE 10y ago
> Unfortunately, the real market does not have a meaningful lower bound on losses. I don't understand what you mean, here. Are you saying that stocks never went to zero? Because real stocks also don't go below zero (though you can use leverage to lose more money than you put in, I suppose).
- gnopgnip 10y ago
  Real stocks get delisted or go bankrupt all the time.
  - hueving 10y ago
    That's 0
    - zekevermillion 10y ago
      OK, the lower bound on losses you can make on one stock purchased without leverage is == your investment. With repeated activity and/or leverage, there's no hard limit.
- zekevermillion 10y ago
  They would go to 0.01, but there was no insolvency in the game (also no leverage, if memory serves).
daemin 10y ago
There was a similar trading game that I played on the ASX (Australian Stock Exchange) when I was in High School. I tried to do it by just buying regular stocks, but when I looked at the leaderboard the people at the top were always buying 100,000's of a penny stock and selling when it went up. So they could win or lose the game based on luck and how much they bought of that particular penny stock within the game window. Looking back now on that stock trading game, especially because it had a fixed window of time, it really favoured taking the big risks with these penny stocks. You weren't playing with your own money, and you weren't playing the long game either as there was a time you were effectively cashed out. I'm not sure that's the sort of wise saving & investing for the long term that one should be teaching teens/children. It's more for the ASX itself to train another generation of traders, which will make the business richer.

jrs235 10y ago

I loved that game! I believe my family obtained their copy via a bundle called Top Ten Solid Gold Hits!

zekevermillion 10y ago
Yes! That rings a bell. I really miss my old IBM PC. 20MB of drive space and a lot more fun than I've had since, plus it taught me how to make money on penny stocks --har har.

x1798DE 10y ago

> Unfortunately, the real market does not have a meaningful lower bound on losses. I don't understand what you mean, here. Are you saying that stocks never went to zero? Because real stocks also don't go below zero (though you can use leverage to lose more money than you put in, I suppose).

gnopgnip 10y ago
Real stocks get delisted or go bankrupt all the time.
- hueving 10y ago
  That's 0
  - zekevermillion 10y ago
    OK, the lower bound on losses you can make on one stock purchased without leverage is == your investment. With repeated activity and/or leverage, there's no hard limit.
zekevermillion 10y ago
They would go to 0.01, but there was no insolvency in the game (also no leverage, if memory serves).

daemin 10y ago

There was a similar trading game that I played on the ASX (Australian Stock Exchange) when I was in High School. I tried to do it by just buying regular stocks, but when I looked at the leaderboard the people at the top were always buying 100,000's of a penny stock and selling when it went up. So they could win or lose the game based on luck and how much they bought of that particular penny stock within the game window. Looking back now on that stock trading game, especially because it had a fixed window of time, it really favoured taking the big risks with these penny stocks. You weren't playing with your own money, and you weren't playing the long game either as there was a time you were effectively cashed out. I'm not sure that's the sort of wise saving & investing for the long term that one should be teaching teens/children. It's more for the ASX itself to train another generation of traders, which will make the business richer.