Forums  > General  > Brexit  
     
Page 13 of 14Goto to page: 1, 2, 3 ... 12, 13, 14 Prev Next
Display using:  

goldorak


Total Posts: 979
Joined: Nov 2004
 
Posted: 2016-11-11 08:54
> But I haven't seen a plausible justification for why GOOGL, NFLX, AMZN, et al. are worth so much less today than yesterday.

Sounds a lot like August 2007 to me. Aren't people still all relying on the same risk factor models to manage their risk(s)?


If you are not living on the edge you are taking up too much space.

rod


Total Posts: 362
Joined: Nov 2006
 
Posted: 2016-11-11 09:21
There's the reverse Bradley effect, the Shy Tory Factor, Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann's spiral of silence theory, and also Timur Kuran's theory of preference falsification, "the act of misrepresenting one's genuine wants under perceived social pressures".

Kuran wrote about it in Private Truths, Public Lies: The Social Consequences of Preference Falsification.

Maggette


Total Posts: 943
Joined: Jun 2007
 
Posted: 2016-11-11 10:08
I am no US citizen so I don't exactly know the individual election proccess.

But is it possible, that there is a control theory problem going on here?

Assume I am pro Clinton an I see that the polls are goin my direction and then I start thinking "maybe I just stay on th ecouch an whatch the game?". Is it possible that many people don't vote because they think they already know and like the outcome?

Of course you could argue in th eother dirction (pro Trump is thinking "I can't change anything, we have already lost. I stay on the couch and watch the game")?

Ich kam hierher und sah dich und deine Leute lächeln, und sagte mir: Maggette, scheiss auf den small talk, lass lieber deine Fäuste sprechen...

ronin


Total Posts: 205
Joined: May 2006
 
Posted: 2016-11-11 11:01
Just based on reading the news, there is - so far - more evidence for the "low turnout of Latinos/African Americans" than the "shy Trump voter" effect. There will be a lot of research into it in the time to come, so I'm sure we'll get better idea as the time passes.

I guess that turnout levels will become a major topic of research in polling.

You can see why that is difficult to calibrate. There is really not that much data to go with - large elections only happen once every 4 or 5 years or so. Small local elections only attract a small sub-set of population, which is by default politically engaged or concerned with local issues, so not really representative.

Past voting record is also not very reliable - somebody in their twenties would only have been eligible to vote once or twice in the past. In that time their entire life would have changed - married, employed people with children are a completely different group with different priorities from students and young professionals. A bunch of voters died in the last eight years, a bunch of others only came of age. Some became responsible adults. Some are in prisons. Some have been unemployed for a while, some have stopped being unemployed, and some have retired.

It would be crazy to try calibrating a trading model with 4 to 8 year old data. But for a polling model, that is the best you have.







"People say nothing's impossible, but I do nothing every day" --Winnie The Pooh

katastrofa


Total Posts: 359
Joined: Jul 2008
 
Posted: 2016-11-11 11:40
There's that too: voter suppression

granchio


Total Posts: 1530
Joined: Apr 2004
 
Posted: 2016-11-12 18:37
My 0.02$ on the reason of tech selloff: Trump increases the chances of tariffs: they will disrupt the supply chain of tech pretty heavily, increasing their costs, and after that the inevitable retaliatory measures will decrease their revenues in non-US countries.

In short: large tech companies are among the most globalised both in revenues and costs: and globalisation is sooo six months ago now.

Stand to reason that they'll suffer much more than businesses contained within a nation, of which there are a few, if not many.


"Deserve got nothing to do with it" - Clint

ronin


Total Posts: 205
Joined: May 2006
 
Posted: 2016-11-14 11:55
@granchio, I am not sure that makes sense. What tariffs on GOOG or FB? If anything, they have a lot of cash overseas which they may bring back under some tax-forgiveness-for-investment-in-infrastructure scheme.

As it happens, I don't particularly think they were ever worth their pre-Donald prices. They are all mature businesses at or near saturation point, in terms of both revenue per account and account acquisition. And they are still priced like startups in a garage when the only options are triple digit organic growth, or bust.



"People say nothing's impossible, but I do nothing every day" --Winnie The Pooh

Luciender


Total Posts: 73
Joined: Aug 2008
 
Posted: 2016-11-14 12:54
Not sure if its a contributing factor to the sell-off, but there was a verdict on AirBnB with potential implications for quite a few others in tech. They might be liable for quite a bit more of what 3rd parties do on their platforms than previously assumed.

https://skift.com/2016/11/08/judge-tells-airbnb-he-doesnt-buy-its-free-speech-argument-in-san-francisco/

katastrofa


Total Posts: 359
Joined: Jul 2008
 
Posted: 2016-11-14 13:04
Oh dear, the free lunch is over :D

NIP247


Total Posts: 540
Joined: Feb 2005
 
Posted: 2016-11-15 07:10
December 3, 2015 - "Etna Unleashes Short but Spectacular Eruption"

Will December 3, 2016 be the next Brexit moment for Europe and the fragile-looking markets?

[EDIT:referendum is apparently on the 4th ]

On your straddle, done on the puts, working the calls...

granchio


Total Posts: 1530
Joined: Apr 2004
 
Posted: 2016-11-16 00:27
On italian referendum: funny, all the italians I know (me included) cannot see why it's such a big deal... yes the government might fall. so what? that's what italian governments do.
But on the other hand, most non-italian have got their pants in a twist about it. So it's important because they think it's important.

On tech: @ronin granted, Google and FB might not have massive exposure to foreign supply chain, and might indeed benefit on the repatration of cash. They are not the only tech companies though are they? And I suspect they might also suffer by increased "trade wars" (i.e. being picked upon by non-US just for being US).
Overall, call me Lapalisse, but I suspect most globalised companies will suffer if there is a serious slow-down in globalisation (i.e. competitive devaluations, tariffs, tit-for-tat regulation and taxation, expropriations, walls, progroms, low-intensity conflicts, proxy terrorism, escalate ad lib), one way or another.

"Deserve got nothing to do with it" - Clint

ronin


Total Posts: 205
Joined: May 2006
 
Posted: 2016-11-16 11:14
>On tech: @ronin granted, Google and FB might not have massive exposure to foreign supply chain, and might indeed benefit on the repatration of cash. They are not the only tech companies though are they? And I suspect they might also suffer by increased "trade wars" (i.e. being picked upon by non-US just for being US).

The original comment on tech was about GOOG, NFLX and AMZN. I suppose AAPL and TSLA might be better examples, but they are not particularly tariff sensitive. Trade between the US, EU and China is actually subject to tariffs already, and the effect of tariffs on AAPL and TSLA is precisely zero. You want an iphone, you buy an iphone - you don't buy something else because there is a few dollars worth of tariff included in the price of the iphone. "Tariff sensitive goods" means cheap stuff which is pretty much all made in China and Vietnam - not the US (or Britain, for that matter).

> On italian referendum (...) it's important because they think it's important.

I am beginning to feel the same about Brexit.


"People say nothing's impossible, but I do nothing every day" --Winnie The Pooh

AndyM


Total Posts: 2308
Joined: Mar 2004
 
Posted: 2016-11-16 12:59
Italian referendum chatter is largely the usual Anglo-Saxon wish-fulfilment. But these guys set the news agenda, so one has to be careful. Still, there's usually a good opportunity to fade this sort of thing.

Funny how this thread has become a moveable feast: Brexit ->Trump -> Italy. Quants have a tendency towards catastrophism, for reasons I have yet to figure out. Maybe they don't get the attention and $$ they think they deserve while seeing leverage monkeys prospering, and thus fervently hope for a system reset?

I used to be disgusted; now I try to be amused...

katastrofa


Total Posts: 359
Joined: Jul 2008
 
Posted: 2016-11-16 13:31
I hope for a system reset not because I'm personally so disappointed with it - it has served me pretty well. I'm just tired of seeing other people screwed over by it.

ronin


Total Posts: 205
Joined: May 2006
 
Posted: 2016-11-16 14:44
>Funny how this thread has become a moveable feast: Brexit ->Trump -> Italy.

On the bright side, at least nobody has compared anybody to Hitler yet. Presumably it can't be long now.

More seriously, the topic does refresh itself every week or so. Most topics on np are simple in-out affairs, but this has become a regular soap opera.

> Quants have a tendency towards catastrophism

Well, many quants are Russian...


"People say nothing's impossible, but I do nothing every day" --Winnie The Pooh

katastrofa


Total Posts: 359
Joined: Jul 2008
 
Posted: 2016-11-16 14:50
Soap opera? We're witnessing history. The end of neo-liberalism.

AndyM


Total Posts: 2308
Joined: Mar 2004
 
Posted: 2016-11-16 14:56
Ronin, good point on the Russian angle.

I used to be disgusted; now I try to be amused...

rod


Total Posts: 362
Joined: Nov 2006
 
Posted: 2016-11-16 15:45
I am surprised that no one has yet mentioned Robert Mercer of RenTec, who allegedly donated serious money to Trump's campaign:

Rebekah Mercer, daughter of major donor, named to Trump role

Let’s not forget to publicly congratulate Robert Mercer on his “private” Trump victory

You’ll have Renaissance Technologies to thank for President Trump

chiral3
Founding Member

Total Posts: 4986
Joined: Mar 2004
 
Posted: 2016-11-16 16:51
I am not sure if I've ever met Mercer. He seems like a real piece of work, though. The lawsuits, the gun collecting, the vitriol,... he seems like the antithesis of the earlier rentec culture. Of course the later culture seemed to reek of assholia.

Nonius is Satoshi Nakamoto. 物の哀れ

rod


Total Posts: 362
Joined: Nov 2006
 
Posted: 2016-11-16 18:27
What kind of man spends millions to elect Ted Cruz? (Jan. 2016)

"Mercer is one of the most enigmatic and powerful forces in U.S. politics. Beginning around the time of Robinson’s race, Mercer has put at least $32 million behind conservative candidates for office, including $11 million for a group supporting Texas Senator Ted Cruz’s campaign for the Republican presidential nomination. So far, Mercer is the biggest single donor in the race. Working with his daughter Rebekah, he’s spent tens of millions more to advance a conservative agenda, investing in think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation, the media outlet Breitbart.com, and Cambridge Analytica, a data company that builds psychological profiles of voters. Groups he funds have attacked the science of global warming, published a book critical of Hillary Clinton, and bankrolled a documentary celebrating Ayn Rand."

rod


Total Posts: 362
Joined: Nov 2006
 
Posted: 2016-11-16 18:32
The rise of GOP mega-donor Rebekah Mercer (Sept. 2016)

"Galvanized in part by the Republicans’ 2012 White House loss, the middle daughter of billionaire hedge fund magnate Robert Mercer has rattled the status quo by directing her family’s resources into an array of investments on the right. In the past six years, the Mercers have poured tens of millions into Republican super PACs, Washington think tanks, state policy shops, a film-production company, a data analytics operation and one of the country’s most provocative online conservative news outlets."

chiral3
Founding Member

Total Posts: 4986
Joined: Mar 2004
 
Posted: 2016-11-21 19:28
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/20/opinion/the-secret-agenda-of-a-facebook-quiz.html?_r=0

Nonius is Satoshi Nakamoto. 物の哀れ

rowdyroddypiper
NP Wrestling Champion

Total Posts: 1172
Joined: Apr 2004
 
Posted: 2016-11-21 22:42
"They are all mature businesses at or near saturation point, in terms of both revenue per account and account acquisition."

I respectfully disagree. Advertising is a $520bn. annual market. Digital is a fraction of this and growing. Facebook and Google both have extremely strong moats in the digital space (FB native, Google - search) and are poised to capture a disproportionate share as ad spend shifts further into digital. FB and Google both continue to extend their advantage here and I don't really see that changing.

The major risk I see to Google is that search becomes less relevant as user tracking (and time spent inside of walled gardens like Facebook) increases, allowing user intent to be inferred versus explicitly stated via search. That may narrow the premium that search can command but it's still going to be a major channel for advertising.

Of course it could be the case that advertising goes away or budgets decrease but I think that's more of a macro issue and FB/GOOG would have more downside protection than a lot of other stocks.

Just my $2 CPM.

Revolution to the mean

EspressoLover


Total Posts: 224
Joined: Jan 2015
 
Posted: 2016-11-22 00:55
@rowdy

I know some people in the ad-tech business. I get the impression it's a pretty dirty business, and that FB and Google have a fair bit of mud on their boots. Things like clearly looking the other way on black-hat ads (banned keywords, 1-pixel display ads, bot impressions, etc.). Especially right before the close of a fiscal quarter where they need to beef up the numbers. (Actually I hear FB is the least bad of the bunch, ironic given Google's "do no evil" mantra)

I think right now ad-buyers love digital because it's got the halo of futuristic tech-utopa Silicon Valley culture around it. And yes, eventually nearly all advertising will be digital. But I can't help but expect, that all the ad-tech bullshit is really going to start becoming more obvious. Ad-buyers are going to migrate away from digital, or at least the existing tainted players, until it cleans up its act.

http://fortune.com/2015/07/01/online-advertising-fraud/

rowdyroddypiper
NP Wrestling Champion

Total Posts: 1172
Joined: Apr 2004
 
Posted: 2016-11-22 03:23
Digital fraud is the headline. Advertisers are more worried about transparency across media channels. The report below pretty much lays out their case. A lot of the stuff you are talking about from the digital side ironically drives people to google and Facebook as it's much more transparent than stuff like programmatic display.

https://www.ana.net/content/show/id/pr-media-transparency

Revolution to the mean
Previous Thread :: Next Thread 
Page 13 of 14Goto to page: 1, 2, 3 ... 12, 13, 14 Prev Next