3 ms·

> I'm too conservative to bet the bank, but I haven't been wrong yet. You are being cocky because you are dabbling with small money, when you play with big mon

by sumedh 8y ago

> I'm too conservative to bet the bank, but I haven't been wrong yet. You are being cocky because you are dabbling with small money, when you play with big money, your emotions will immediate change and that is when you will make mistakes.

speedplane 8y ago
> when you play with big money, your emotions will immediate change and that is when you will make mistakes That's precisely why I don't play with big money, not that I have so much anyway. I wonder though, if I was playing with someone else's "big money", if you could keep those emotions in check.
- fossuser 8y ago
  That’s the real trick - convince others to give you a lot of money and when you win you get a big cut and when you lose it’s not your money and you just do something else. Seems to be the way all hedge funds operate, maybe can even charge membership fees too.
  - speedplane 8y ago
    Right... most traders get big bonuses when they win, but if they lose, at worst they get fired. If you can win for a while and then get fired eventually, you'll still end up on top.
    - gaius 8y ago
      Trader A makes $10m in year 1 and gets a $1m bonus. She loses $10m in year 2, and gets no bonus so the firm is down her $1m bonus. Trader B makes $1m in years 1 and 2. That’s too low to trigger a bonus, but his firm is up $2m. The system doesn’t reward trader B so he has to choose: do what’s right for the firm, or take big risks in the hope of a bonus (Simplifying dramatically)
    - cheez 8y ago
      Many firms implement clawbacks for this instance
  - Lavery 8y ago
    Part of the trick to convincing people to invest with you is having a significant amount of your own money in the fund. So that's one hurdle here. It's possible to raise enough that your management fee renders irrelevant whatever you might lose trading your own money, but at that point you're in big league hedge fund scale anyway and will be very tightly scrutinized. Also, losing client money is just as emotionally difficult and stressful and guilt inducing--maybe more so--than losing your own for anyone with a half normal sense of responsibility and fiduciary duty.
skookumchuck 8y ago
True enough. I've realized that my investment strategy would be completely different if I was using Monopoly money, and I'd probably have made 10x as much money.
downandout 8y ago
>and that is when you will make mistakes. While some trades using this method may not work out, the idea that he must make mistakes simply because he is risking larger amounts is not at all a given. Some people have no sensitivity to such things. I know a couple of advantage gamblers that sometimes play $10,000+/hand on blackjack, and it might as well be $5 to them - not because they are super wealthy, but because they know they have an advantage, and understand that the math will work out over the long term. Whether they win or lose on a given hand, or wind up winning or losing on a given day, is meaningless to them and they rarely get emotional about it. The same certainly applies to many stock traders.

by sumedh 8y ago

speedplane 8y ago

> when you play with big money, your emotions will immediate change and that is when you will make mistakes That's precisely why I don't play with big money, not that I have so much anyway. I wonder though, if I was playing with someone else's "big money", if you could keep those emotions in check.

fossuser 8y ago
That’s the real trick - convince others to give you a lot of money and when you win you get a big cut and when you lose it’s not your money and you just do something else. Seems to be the way all hedge funds operate, maybe can even charge membership fees too.
- speedplane 8y ago
  Right... most traders get big bonuses when they win, but if they lose, at worst they get fired. If you can win for a while and then get fired eventually, you'll still end up on top.
  - gaius 8y ago
    Trader A makes $10m in year 1 and gets a $1m bonus. She loses $10m in year 2, and gets no bonus so the firm is down her $1m bonus. Trader B makes $1m in years 1 and 2. That’s too low to trigger a bonus, but his firm is up $2m. The system doesn’t reward trader B so he has to choose: do what’s right for the firm, or take big risks in the hope of a bonus (Simplifying dramatically)
  - cheez 8y ago
    Many firms implement clawbacks for this instance
- Lavery 8y ago
  Part of the trick to convincing people to invest with you is having a significant amount of your own money in the fund. So that's one hurdle here. It's possible to raise enough that your management fee renders irrelevant whatever you might lose trading your own money, but at that point you're in big league hedge fund scale anyway and will be very tightly scrutinized. Also, losing client money is just as emotionally difficult and stressful and guilt inducing--maybe more so--than losing your own for anyone with a half normal sense of responsibility and fiduciary duty.

skookumchuck 8y ago

True enough. I've realized that my investment strategy would be completely different if I was using Monopoly money, and I'd probably have made 10x as much money.

downandout 8y ago

>and that is when you will make mistakes. While some trades using this method may not work out, the idea that he must make mistakes simply because he is risking larger amounts is not at all a given. Some people have no sensitivity to such things. I know a couple of advantage gamblers that sometimes play $10,000+/hand on blackjack, and it might as well be $5 to them - not because they are super wealthy, but because they know they have an advantage, and understand that the math will work out over the long term. Whether they win or lose on a given hand, or wind up winning or losing on a given day, is meaningless to them and they rarely get emotional about it. The same certainly applies to many stock traders.