4 ms·

Why don't you do the calculation then, instead of dismissing an article/calculation based on something you're not even sure is true?

asdfasgasdgasdg 7y ago
You want me to . . . hand-calculate market-weighted total return of an index? Without access to the underlying financials? That's a big ask for an internet comment. I didn't dismiss the article. I provided additional context that might be helpful in evaluating its claims. You are free to do with that what you will. https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/indices/nyse_arca_global_airline_index.pdf https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/indices/nyse_arca_globa... "The Index tracks the price performance ..." suggests that my surmise is correct, at least for the global version of this index.
- graeme 7y ago
  > You want me to . . . hand-calculate market-weighted total return of an index? Without access to the underlying financials? That's a big ask for an internet comment. Here’s a handy tool to do just that! Unfortunately only goes back to 2007, so not useful in present case of airline stocks. But a very useful tool. https://dqydj.com/stock-return-calculator/ https://dqydj.com/stock-return-calculator/
- aguyfromnb 7y ago
  >That's a big ask for an internet comment. So your solution is to "guess" that it didn't happen? >I didn't dismiss the article. I provided additional context that might be helpful in evaluating its claims. You didn't add anything. You insinuated that it wasn't correct, with zero evidence or knowledge. Why didn't you add other things, like maybe the journalist made the entire thing up? Or perhaps the whole measure of the index is simply a lie and doesn't exist? I guess I shouldn't be surprised that people here consider random aspersions "adding context".
  - asdfasgasdgasdg 7y ago
    I'm puzzled that you think factual and relevant context is an aspersion. The article is technically correct that asset prices took a long time to recover to the previous levels. But it is limited in its application. In order to judge the return of an investment, you have to look at not just its asset price but what it produces. A chicken only decreases in value from the time it begins laying eggs, but that doesn't make it a bad investment. Same with the airlines. > So your solution is to "guess" that it didn't happen? It's not a guess. It's an informed inference from my knowledge of airline dividend habits, which I subsequently backed up with a citation. However, I will not do hours of modeling work to satisfy your curiosity. If you want that information, do it yourself.

asdfasgasdgasdg 7y ago

You want me to . . . hand-calculate market-weighted total return of an index? Without access to the underlying financials? That's a big ask for an internet comment. I didn't dismiss the article. I provided additional context that might be helpful in evaluating its claims. You are free to do with that what you will. https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/indices/nyse_arca_global_airline_index.pdf https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/indices/nyse_arca_globa... "The Index tracks the price performance ..." suggests that my surmise is correct, at least for the global version of this index.

graeme 7y ago
> You want me to . . . hand-calculate market-weighted total return of an index? Without access to the underlying financials? That's a big ask for an internet comment. Here’s a handy tool to do just that! Unfortunately only goes back to 2007, so not useful in present case of airline stocks. But a very useful tool. https://dqydj.com/stock-return-calculator/ https://dqydj.com/stock-return-calculator/
aguyfromnb 7y ago
>That's a big ask for an internet comment. So your solution is to "guess" that it didn't happen? >I didn't dismiss the article. I provided additional context that might be helpful in evaluating its claims. You didn't add anything. You insinuated that it wasn't correct, with zero evidence or knowledge. Why didn't you add other things, like maybe the journalist made the entire thing up? Or perhaps the whole measure of the index is simply a lie and doesn't exist? I guess I shouldn't be surprised that people here consider random aspersions "adding context".
- asdfasgasdgasdg 7y ago
  I'm puzzled that you think factual and relevant context is an aspersion. The article is technically correct that asset prices took a long time to recover to the previous levels. But it is limited in its application. In order to judge the return of an investment, you have to look at not just its asset price but what it produces. A chicken only decreases in value from the time it begins laying eggs, but that doesn't make it a bad investment. Same with the airlines. > So your solution is to "guess" that it didn't happen? It's not a guess. It's an informed inference from my knowledge of airline dividend habits, which I subsequently backed up with a citation. However, I will not do hours of modeling work to satisfy your curiosity. If you want that information, do it yourself.