5 ms·
Erm, he is claiming that companies don't go public due to unchecked market rigging and that somehow regulation rather than lack of it is to blame - the doubleth
by dreamfactory2 12y ago
Erm, he is claiming that companies don't go public due to unchecked market rigging and that somehow regulation rather than lack of it is to blame - the doublethink is strong in this one.
And I've no idea why somebody who is in investment wouldn't be well aware that secular bear markets are typically longer than 10 years (http://www.tradingonlinemarkets.com/Articles/Trend_Following_Strategies/History_of_Stock_Market_Cycles.htm http://www.tradingonlinemarkets.com/Articles/Trend_Following...).
He seems to be a complete buffoon from this interview.
- bitdiddle 12y ago+1
- ScottBurson 12y agoHe is arguing that the force of that regulation falls unfairly on public companies, against whom it can be enforced effectively, and not on individuals starting rumors, who are numerous and hard to track down. That's not a silly claim.
- dreamfactory2 12y agoThe problem he is talking about is market manipulation. Let's be clear, disclosure is precisely to prevent market rigging by insider trading and indirection (as the notion of a free market depends on all participants having equal information). He's in fact advocating going back to an insider's club and trying to dress it up as the opposite. I don't know if he's just stupid or he thinks the readers are.