bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
I appreciate the pick, I just hate the tech behind it. LoL.
You would think people learned from the Hindenburg . . .
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
What other tech stock to consider?
- Thread starter Sanny
- Start date
I appreciate the pick, I just hate the tech behind it. LoL.
You would think people learned from the Hindenburg . . .
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
NKLA made similar moves, doesn't mean it was a good stock. Hydrogen is a tough sell around here for good reason.
I'll just leave this here
My comment on my own chart:
Bitcoin is different from all others. The weird thing about it as compared to everything else is that it has a finite supply. While you can mine more bitcoin, the algorithm makes it such that finding new ones become asymptotically harder as time goes on. So unlike a normal market, supply does not increase to meet demand.
Question: were previous gold bubbles deflated by extra supply coming on board, or was it just that investors decided to move on? ie. In 1981, it became clear that inflation was getting under control, so the reason behind gold faltered?
The scary thing about bitcoin is that we haven't really run into an expected inflationary spiral even yet. Imagine what it will do when/if we do.
Tes La Ferrari
Active Member
I picked up a bit of CCIV.
Any potential timeline / date forecasts for the CCIV / Lucid SPAC ?
Any potential timeline / date forecasts for the CCIV / Lucid SPAC ?
I ended my relationships with Bitcoin after I realized for myself that it 1) does not have a good way to short it (so everyone earn money only on long) 2) unregulated (so everyone can pump it by any means) 3) highly concentrated (so whales can do whatever they want).
After that, I sold every bit of it and stopped caring about it.
Not at all! I am new here but I greatly benefited from your tip. I sold at $70 today for a nice little profit
I dont think this is confirmed. The current run-up is based on a 'speculative' report on Bloomberg.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
We have different definitions of a good stock. I don't consider one propped up by lies and hype to be "good" regardless of how it might trade in the short term. The bottom could have been pulled out from NKLA at any second because the support was based on nothing. That's just gambling.
NKLA is a pretty unique case, I would hardly compare PLUG to them, and lets be honest that this is all just gambling. I just meant that NKLA stock was quite "good" at being profitable for a while (and may be again soon).
TSLA was doing some shady accounting for a while and Elon has been loose with the truth but I don't call TSLA a bad company... TSLA was the one stock I held for a long time though I am almost completely out now because I think the current valuation is crazy.
Besides, I think we're getting off on a tangent here. I am bringing stock picks to the thread that I think have short term large growth potential due to things like mergers, sector momentum, or other pending news. I have recommended the following so far:
- PLUG at $28 (now ~ $70)
- RMO at $28 (just for the merger) and sold quickly for 15% profit though it is down now.
- NGA (Lion Electric SPAC) at $17.75 (now at ~$30)
- BNGO at $2.50 (now at $5.16)
- WISH at $20 (now at $23.51 just two days later)
- BUSXF this morning (up 13.5% today)
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
I'm not sure why you would object to rational critiques of stocks. This is a discussion board.
True, but people who listened to conference call yesterday say it was heavily implied it's going through.
I sold nearly all of my BLDP today, (in from 4$). I'm probably going to lighten up on BE as well but I still like the stock. I'll wait for an unnecessary pull back to add to BE. probably not BLDP
While finite, we won't mine all the bitcoin in our lifetimes.. The next million is one thing, the last 2 million will take a century. My fear is that in about 25 years all the electricity in the world will be used to mine bitcoin. It will be pretty funny to watch.
I don't recall that unless our definitions of "shady accounting" are different.
And I think that's what the "discussion clash" here is all about. Some people only buy stocks if they believe in the stock for the long term. Coffee can investing if you will. The stocks can still be speculative, as TSLA always was, but you have a conviction that, long term, the company will do well.
What you have above is more of an active trading strategy. Find short term opportunities and exploit them. It isn't "gambling" anymore than sticking long term with a stock is "gambling". Both are bets about the future and both can be based on equal amounts of information. IMHO, it takes a lot more intestinal fortitude to be an active trader. You always have to be in the game paying attention. If you go on a 2 week vacation, you might want to close out all positions, etc.
Both are very valid ways of investing in the stock market, but not everyone can execute either strategy well. Depends a lot of your personality type, ability to do certain kinds of research, etc.
FWIW I'm loving the recommendations folks make here.
Maybe we can solve some of concerns above by simply tagging a stock as a "swing" (few hours, days, weeks, months) or investment with proper DD. In which case you don't care if it pops 20% or whatever, since you plan on hodling for 5-10+ yrs.
The latter requires lots of research, and this could be a good starting point for folks, but I would never buy a 5-10+ yr hold just based on someone else's recommendation without doing my own DD.
Maybe we can solve some of concerns above by simply tagging a stock as a "swing" (few hours, days, weeks, months) or investment with proper DD. In which case you don't care if it pops 20% or whatever, since you plan on hodling for 5-10+ yrs.
The latter requires lots of research, and this could be a good starting point for folks, but I would never buy a 5-10+ yr hold just based on someone else's recommendation without doing my own DD.
Please contribute, by all means! Don't take criticism of a company as criticism of whether your pick was good or not.
I'm not going to invest in certain companies because I don't believe in them: perhaps on a technical level (e.g. NKLA) or perhaps on a ethical level (e.g. an oil stock). That doesn't mean I think your pick is bad, just that whether the stock goes up or down is only part of the consideration. Some of us might want to debate the some of those other merits, but please don't take that as a criticism of your contribution to the conversation.
Similar threads
- Article
