I was reading this thread:
http://somersoft.com/forums/showthread.php?t=86783
And it got me thinking.
There were several attempts to identify the short comings of Peter Spans sharemarket funds on this very forum several years ago.
But the threads got locked by the moderators (I can understand this, they don't want to get sued).
Anyone listening to those threads would have not suffered the degree of loss that has been seen now.
At first I was thinking that this is because modern day society is so moddey coddled that they have trouble assessing independent risk.
But then I reflected on the underlying nature of man-kind.
There are a couple of very interesting stock market books that were written in the early 1900's.
Its fascinating to me, because it shows that some things change, yet the underlying behavioural characteristics of mankind doesn't change.
From 100 years ago:
The average man does not want to spend the time to intelligently assess an investment opportunity. What he want is to get something for nothing. He does not wish to work, nor think.
Its much easier to delegate this to someone else and possess that other potential flaw in mankind: hope.
It is why both trends (as investment opportunities and not trading opportunities, ie not knowing the different between investing and trading opportunities) and tips are so popular.
From the 1920's:
The sucker has always tried to get something for nothing, and the appeal in all booms is frankly to the gambling instinct aroused by cupidity and spurred by a pervasive prosperity. People who look for easy money invariably find that it cannot be found on this sordid earth.
At first, when I listened to the accounts of old-time deals and devices I used to think that people were more gullible in the 1860s and ’70s than in the 1900s. But I was sure to read in the newspapers that very day or the next something about the latest Ponzi or the bust-up of some bucketing broker and about the millions of sucker money gone to join the silent majority of vanished
It is too much bother to have to count the money that e picks up from the ground
http://somersoft.com/forums/showthread.php?t=86783
And it got me thinking.
There were several attempts to identify the short comings of Peter Spans sharemarket funds on this very forum several years ago.
But the threads got locked by the moderators (I can understand this, they don't want to get sued).
Anyone listening to those threads would have not suffered the degree of loss that has been seen now.
At first I was thinking that this is because modern day society is so moddey coddled that they have trouble assessing independent risk.
But then I reflected on the underlying nature of man-kind.
There are a couple of very interesting stock market books that were written in the early 1900's.
Its fascinating to me, because it shows that some things change, yet the underlying behavioural characteristics of mankind doesn't change.
From 100 years ago:
The average man does not want to spend the time to intelligently assess an investment opportunity. What he want is to get something for nothing. He does not wish to work, nor think.
Its much easier to delegate this to someone else and possess that other potential flaw in mankind: hope.
It is why both trends (as investment opportunities and not trading opportunities, ie not knowing the different between investing and trading opportunities) and tips are so popular.
From the 1920's:
The sucker has always tried to get something for nothing, and the appeal in all booms is frankly to the gambling instinct aroused by cupidity and spurred by a pervasive prosperity. People who look for easy money invariably find that it cannot be found on this sordid earth.
At first, when I listened to the accounts of old-time deals and devices I used to think that people were more gullible in the 1860s and ’70s than in the 1900s. But I was sure to read in the newspapers that very day or the next something about the latest Ponzi or the bust-up of some bucketing broker and about the millions of sucker money gone to join the silent majority of vanished
It is too much bother to have to count the money that e picks up from the ground
Last edited:
