5 ms·

I've never understood that argument. Can't they just sink more money into the stock market?

baybal2 8y ago
They want it on better terms, and have access to companies not on stock markets including all those pets.coms
sonnyblarney 8y ago
Supply and Demand. More demand is better terms for stock sellers, i.e. companies. And their investing would probably completely skew the market. So it's hard. Investing directly might put them at risk of some kind of oversight as well. And they already have a lot tied up in those kinds of investments anyhow. They own a lot of real estate around the world as well. It's hard to find places to park that amount of money esp. if there are political considerations. Nobody is worried about taking money from the Norwegians ...
- verbify 8y ago
  But there's more than one stock market - there are so many around the world, surely them buying couldn't make that much of an impact?
  - sonnyblarney 8y ago
    " there are so many around the world" Not really. Or rather, they are smaller in terms of market cap. Also - you basically have US and EU, the rest are very high risk, and subject to all sorts of shenanigans. That's how much money the Saudis have. We need to go clean nuclear, it would solve so many problems ...
gammateam 8y ago
Sinking more money in the stock market is the same as getting a worse deal or concession in any fund. Stocks are already bought up to levels that don't make a meaningful theoretical return if the individual companies started returning capital via dividends. Bonds are in the same situation, they have been bought up beyond sane levels (theoretical return based on coupon and yield curve) pushing their yield to lower rates than risk and inflation would warrant. Basically, with bonds you have to accept that some issuers will go bankrupt and you get a 100% loss on that portion of the portfolio, therefore the whole portfolio of bonds has to account for that risk and it can't right now, if you keep buying more of them at higher prices Getting out of the public markets you go into the private equity markets. There are plenty of investments to fund which nobody else is funding due to the way the deal looks or the way the team looks. You go further out on the risk curve, and also accomplish the goal of keeping money flowing in the economy. This is what the central banks wanted to happen: assets prices and yields of everything passive is so unattractive that people are forced to make their capital more productive in the economy. Sure they didn't expect people to plow into crypto, but risk is risk and yield is yield. It is more likely that Softbank functions as an economic stimulus backed by the Bank of Japan's economic policy decisions.

They want it on better terms, and have access to companies not on stock markets including all those pets.coms

Supply and Demand. More demand is better terms for stock sellers, i.e. companies. And their investing would probably completely skew the market. So it's hard. Investing directly might put them at risk of some kind of oversight as well. And they already have a lot tied up in those kinds of investments anyhow. They own a lot of real estate around the world as well. It's hard to find places to park that amount of money esp. if there are political considerations. Nobody is worried about taking money from the Norwegians ...

verbify 8y ago
But there's more than one stock market - there are so many around the world, surely them buying couldn't make that much of an impact?
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  " there are so many around the world" Not really. Or rather, they are smaller in terms of market cap. Also - you basically have US and EU, the rest are very high risk, and subject to all sorts of shenanigans. That's how much money the Saudis have. We need to go clean nuclear, it would solve so many problems ...

gammateam 8y ago

Sinking more money in the stock market is the same as getting a worse deal or concession in any fund. Stocks are already bought up to levels that don't make a meaningful theoretical return if the individual companies started returning capital via dividends. Bonds are in the same situation, they have been bought up beyond sane levels (theoretical return based on coupon and yield curve) pushing their yield to lower rates than risk and inflation would warrant. Basically, with bonds you have to accept that some issuers will go bankrupt and you get a 100% loss on that portion of the portfolio, therefore the whole portfolio of bonds has to account for that risk and it can't right now, if you keep buying more of them at higher prices Getting out of the public markets you go into the private equity markets. There are plenty of investments to fund which nobody else is funding due to the way the deal looks or the way the team looks. You go further out on the risk curve, and also accomplish the goal of keeping money flowing in the economy. This is what the central banks wanted to happen: assets prices and yields of everything passive is so unattractive that people are forced to make their capital more productive in the economy. Sure they didn't expect people to plow into crypto, but risk is risk and yield is yield. It is more likely that Softbank functions as an economic stimulus backed by the Bank of Japan's economic policy decisions.