Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by RetroTechie 5 days ago
Simplistic view:

If some stock is overvalued, an investor pays more to own a share than company's fundamentals would suggest.

But: it's still supply & demand! If there's many buyers willing to pay more than fundamentals suggest is wise or 'fair', so be it. As long as demand for those shares stays up, investors can sell their share(s) for same overvalued price they bought it for.

Also there may be buyers expecting company to become wildly profitable at some point. Call that a gamble (maybe an educated gamble?). Maybe shareholder just wants to financially support whatever 'cause' that company is pursuing.

Worst case, those shares are hot potatoes & someone will be holding the bag some day. Should I care? Should you? Imho: as long as the 'gamblers' footing the bill when things go south, and the people profiting while things go a-okay, are 1 and the same: let 'm have fun.

Problem is when rewards are in one place, while risk is held by others (negative externalities, 'too big to fail', taxpayer funded bailouts & the like).

1 comments

If an investment relies on new investors to pay previous investors and exaggerates the underlying value of the investment, that is known as a Ponzi scheme. I don't think we should legalise Ponzi schemes as long as they're fun for those involved, though I suppose coming up with exactly how to deal with them would be something professional regulators would have more experience in and could almost certainly do better than I would.