>the market is made up millions of idiots picking stocks and

False dichotomy. You seem to think that the existence of stock picking idiots must mean that you can take advantage of them by getting better deals, profiting from their dumb trades. However, everyone trades at market price. That's not the mistakes that stock pickers make.

The mistakes are (a) timing, and (b) fees.

Fees are pretty obvious, and you can't profit off them without opening your own brokerage or advisory firm.

TIming is more subtle, but it goes back to the fact that you cannot beat the market. The market, by definition, is buy-and-hold. The market (measured by the indexes) never buys and never sells ... it's a continuing bundle of stocks that benefits from the inherent positive bias of GDP, technology, etc. It goes up regardless of the individual stocks in the bundle because of external changes in demand, efficiency, demographics, etc.

In contrast to the unwavering market, stock pickers make emotion-driven buy and sell decisions, and constantly enter and exit positions at suboptimal times. People try to time the markets, "buy the dips," "wait it out," and all other forms of self-delusion that drive them into suboptimal trades versus the market/buy-and-hold. As such, the average investor drastically underperforms the market -- by 4-8 percentage points every year, according to the studies.

So while you can't beat the market, you CAN beat the average investor. Easily. How?

1. By mirroring the market; and
2. By keeping your fees as low as possible.

In other words, by buying low-cost index funds and holding them for the long-term.

>>1094089
Market price is created by the millions of idiots. You can absolutely take advantage of this.

Telling yourself that you're special or the rules don't apply to you and that you're not one of those millions of idiots is the fastest way to failure at anything in life.

>>1094098
>Market price is created by the millions of idiots.
Half the idiots cancel out the other half. It doesn't matter which half you're in because there's always someone equally dumb but with opposite intentions.

>You can absolutely take advantage of this.
Sure, if you had the technology and market position. But you? You're fighting for price scraps against sophisticated computers and algorithmic trading platforms that simulate the trading actions of billions of traders at lightspeed. And since they literally make the markets that you're hopeless trying to compete in, you always lose.

So unless you're at least part-owner of a HFT market-making firm, you're not profiting off anything.

>>1094006


cause you got the idiots that don't read the
charts and buy stocks when their over bought

> HUUR DUR i think ill buy some UWTi its at $1.48 that a good price HuuR Duur

File: 80s biz.jpg (50KB, 941x760px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 941x760px

>>1094089
See:
>>1094098


i.e. you fucked up.

I think index funds are great but the market is not efficient.

File: jermany.jpg (163KB, 1009x893px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 1009x893px

>>1094138
>half

Great ad hoc hypothesis there. Lurk more.

>>1094349
>>1094352
Great. Meme-Boy is here to shit up yet another thread.

>MODS. MODS. MODS. MODS.

>>1094089
This is a great post.

I would add one thing:

>The mistakes are (a) timing, and (b) fees.
(c) picking companies that fail.

When you buy and hold index funds like anon suggested, you mitigate the problems of failing companies because you will own all the winners and be more weighted to the winners and less weighted to the losers.

Five star post otherwise.

>the markets are random
>this means people literally randomly buy/sell posititions

>>1094006
>you cant beat the market
This one is statistically true, because most people can't. But if it were to say
>nobody can beat the market
It would be incorrect. Buffett is one example so it's untrue. You can beat the market, if you're good enough. Most people aren't good enough though.
And you have to understand I'm not saying 1 in a hundred or even thousand can beat the market, maybe one in 100m can beat the market, but it clearly can happen.

With research, you can beat the market. 90% of the market is uninformed retards throwing their money into a pit.

Sooner or later, though... even retards are beholden to the realities of what's going on in the world.

The market price isn't 100% reflective of what's going on in reality, but it is constrained by it.

>>1094357
We dont have mods. We dont even have janitors

>>1094006
Anyone can beat the market as long as they constantly continue to learn it and adapt to it. I know complete pothead losers who do great on the market because they spend all day reading articles and they don't bet with all of their account.

Your average idiot who only goes off of recommendations and shit posted on /biz/ will probably fail in the long run.

>>1094374
>Buffett
Every. single. thread.

Warren Buffett does mergers & acquisitions and strategic combinations. While Berkshire Hathaway does some traditional equity investing, their financial statement show that its a de minimus portion of their operations and profits.

So STOP invoking Warren Buffett in every fucking investing thread.

>>1094408
Yeah, now. Mostly I would imagine because he's managing too much money to do anything else.

>>1094408
>Every. single. thread.
You mean the guy with a hard on for index investing?
Telling wannabe traders just how worthless they are?
Yeah, he hangs out in these threads a lot.

>>1094420
>Yeah, now.
Back then too. How do you think "Berkshire Hathaway" became the name of his company?

>Hint: an acquisition

>>1094422
>Telling wannabe traders just how worthless they are?
Doing God's work. I'd buy that man a beer.

>>1094520
>I'd buy that man a beer
I would too, seeing as he has no life.

>>1094555
>most fitting ID ever

>>1094555
Don't get all butthurt.
Maybe you can get Jack Bogle to tell you a bedtime story.

File: Glowcocks.jpg (39KB, 504x360px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 504x360px

>>1094611
>The "COCK glow" man can't even quote posts correctly.

>>1094408
The stock market isn't the only thing you can invest in. In fact if you were to ask Buffet, he would tell you he doesn't invest in stocks, he invests in businesses. This is the fundamental idea behind the value approach.

>>1094635
>he would tell you he doesn't invest in stocks, he invests in businesses
Pretty much exactly what I said in >>1094408.

Unfortunately, his strategy is largely unavailable to the main street investor. None of you have the capital or credit (let alone the experience or knowledge) to engage in alternative investing, let alone M&A. I doubt there's more than 3 accredited investors that have ever visited /biz/ in it's entire history.

>>1094639
>None of you have the capital or credit (let alone the experience or knowledge) to engage in alternative investing, let alone M&A. I doubt there's more than 3 accredited investors that have ever visited /biz/ in it's entire history.

Probably right desu senpai

>>1094520
>Back then too
nice damage control but you're a moron

>>1094138
>So unless you're at least part-owner of a HFT market-making firm, you're not profiting off anything
VIRT. Not doing so well lately though

>>1094520
How do you think he got the money to acquire a company to begin with?

>>1096200
>How do you think he got the money to acquire a company to begin with?
The same way most investment firms do: they raise capital from investors.

At the start, Buffett ran a successful brokerage and raised investment capital from family, friends and local Omaha investors to engage in strategic acquisitions. By 1961 he was doing full scale M&A, including acquiring Berkshire Hathaway (a textile mill) in 1965.

Buffett never played the stock market in the way that you wanna-be traders try and fail.