Alberta’s energy minister says laid off workers could go to B.C.

[Nobama]

Originally Posted by T@T

I take it you don't agree with green intensives? Your right about company sales profits(-1% this year) but they have done very well on stocks overall.

How can anyone compete with a government subsidized company? Not only is the company using your tax dollars to compete with you but the government is making the rules up to suit its investment. Unless we are talking about Communism there is no way a government should be giving money to private business for the sake of policy, green or not.

And the stock market is a complete joke! Can anyone tell me why Facebook is worth more than General Electric?? Please anyone?? Who on this site has given Facebook any money? How about GE??

A website is worth more on Wall Street than General Electric. Please let that sink in for a bit.

How Wallstreet is getting away with this is beyond me.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by Nobama

How can anyone compete with a government subsidized company? Not only is the company using your tax dollars to compete with you but the government is making the rules up to suit its investment. Unless we are talking about Communism there is no way a government should be giving money to private business for the sake of policy, green or not.

And the stock market is a complete joke! Can anyone tell me why Facebook is worth more than General Electric?? Please anyone?? Who on this site has given Facebook any money? How about GE??

A website is worth more on Wall Street than General Electric. Please let that sink in for a bit.

How Wallstreet is getting away with this is beyond me.

Not to get too meta, but the kind of advertising reach Facebook has easily qualifies it's stock price.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Not to get too meta, but the kind of advertising reach Facebook has easily qualifies it's stock price.

Advertising has nothing to do with added value. It just rearranges value.

Anyone interested on this subject should read "The Great Stagnation" and "Average is Over" by Tyler Cowen, "You are not a gadget" by Jaron Lanier, and then the last 5 years of the Financial Times Alphaville blog.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Nobama

A website is worth more on Wall Street than General Electric. Please let that sink in for a bit.

How Wallstreet is getting away with this is beyond me.

How is Wallstreet to blame for Facebook being worth more than GE? Do you even understand the stock market and how a market economy works?

[polak]

Facebook trades the personal information and free time of 1/7th of the population.

[peter12]

Two great pieces on Tesla's so-called "value." Nobama is completely correct. It is a company that has made its profits on the back of rent-seeking government subsidies. Ie. American tax dollars.

http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2015/08/1...es-musk-crash/

http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2015/08/1...-musk-edition/

[Violator]

Her comments really arent off base and have alot of meaning to them.when you work in the trades you are pretty much guaranteed after every big job or certain times of the year you have to pick up and leave.

[Nobama]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

How is Wallstreet to blame for Facebook being worth more than GE? Do you even understand the stock market and how a market economy works?

The scope of GE is astronomical in terms that everyone has most likely used a GE product in the last hour. To compare a company like this to a website is a complete joke, and trust me Wall Street is laughing all the way to the bank.

This is a modern day "Emperor has no clothes" in my opinion.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Nobama

The scope of GE is astronomical in terms that everyone has most likely used a GE product in the last hour. To compare a company like this to a website is a complete joke, and trust me Wall Street is laughing all the way to the bank.

This is a modern day "Emperor has no clothes" in my opinion.

and 1.55 BILLION people have active facebook accounts...

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Nobama

Tesla has never shown a profit. Never. It is a government subsidized company for rich people to buy tax dollar subsidized cars. In fact every electric car on the road was paid by YOUR tax dollars. How the government gets away with this nonsense is mind blowing.

You must really hate General Motors and Chrysler. BTW Tesla is putting all their revenue back into the company, remember they started a new car company from scratch and are currently building a very large battery factory. In 2013 they repaid a $465 million government loan.

Consider how many new auto companies we've had in the last 100 years and given Tesla is trying to rid the market of petrol burners I'd say any government money that goes into the company is well spent. BTW other auto makers also get incentives not just Tesla.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by Nobama

The scope of GE is astronomical in terms that everyone has most likely used a GE product in the last hour. To compare a company like this to a website is a complete joke, and trust me Wall Street is laughing all the way to the bank.

This is a modern day "Emperor has no clothes" in my opinion.

What? Forgive me if I don't trust you.

Do you know who the largest owners of FB are? Fidelity (mutual fund company), Vanguard (mutual fund and ETF company), Blackrock (ETF company). The investors in FB are both retail and institutional investors, that own it through pooled funds or ETFs or own the stock directly. Your parents probably own the stock through a mutual fund (they probably don't even know), or your uncle owns it in his RRSP through an ETF, or your grandma owns it because she's receiving CPP benefits.

Investors value the company like this based on their earnings, their ability to monetize their reach and future growth (to name a few). These investors have driven the price of the stock up since the IPO. Yes it's an expensive stock relative to other stocks (such as GE) based on multiples of earnings and cash flow, but these type of tech companies often are valued higher because they have such enormous potential for growth and monetization. Depending on what kind of investor you are, it could make sense as an investment thesis or it could be a silly investment for you.

Wall Street profited when they took the company public and charged the company fees in order to facilitate access to capital markets. The price of the stock has almost doubled since the IPO, which could even imply that the bankers actually left money on the table.

Or maybe I misinterpreted your definition of "Wall Street"? Did you mean the investment bankers as I assumed, or did you mean the fund management companies who are buying this stock in their portfolios? Or the retail brokers who are generating a commission when your uncle buys the stock in his investment account?

Sorry for the rant but there is just so much BS and misinformation flying around when it comes to this topic, I am a bit butthurt about it.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by heep223

Investors value the company like this based on their earnings, their ability to monetize their reach and future growth (to name a few). These investors have driven the price of the stock up since the IPO. Yes it's an expensive stock relative to other stocks (such as GE) based on multiples of earnings and cash flow, but these type of tech companies often are valued higher because they have such enormous potential for growth and monetization. Depending on what kind of investor you are, it could make sense as an investment thesis or it could be a silly investment for you.

Here is where I take issue it isn't that they have such enormous potential for growth and monetization. Its that they have convinced the market that they have potential for enormous growth and monetization.

The perception of what a stock will do ends up driving the price over what the company will actually do (earnings and dividends).

So while GE has specific earnings and costs and is known. The potential for what's in the box (it could even be a GE) drives price higher because people are terrible at projecting downside risk and over-estimate upside but since the experts in the markets know this it compounds and over-values potential but you can't really bet against it because the stock market is emotionally driven rather then purely economically driven.

[Nobama]

If you think a website should be worth more than General Electric then I would also like to show you a bridge I have for sale. Also I am offering the Statue of Liberty for half price today only.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by GGG

Here is where I take issue it isn't that they have such enormous potential for growth and monetization. Its that they have convinced the market that they have potential for enormous growth and monetization.

The perception of what a stock will do ends up driving the price over what the company will actually do (earnings and dividends).

So while GE has specific earnings and costs and is known. The potential for what's in the box (it could even be a GE) drives price higher because people are terrible at projecting downside risk and over-estimate upside but since the experts in the markets know this it compounds and over-values potential but you can't really bet against it because the stock market is emotionally driven rather then purely economically driven.

Exactly. The overall impact of Silicon Valley ideas and products has a negligible impact on the American economy, but because of two decade of stagnation, everyone jumps on the wagon hoping and praying for another explosion of information technology driven growth.

[Nobama]

Originally Posted by polak

and 1.55 BILLION people have active facebook accounts...

I take it you have a Facebook account. How much money have you spent on Facebook? I would like to extend that question to everyone on Calgarypuck. How much money has anyone spent on Facebook. I bet if we added it all up we couldn't even buy a Happy Meal.

Now lets ask the same question about GE. How much have we collectively spent on GE products or products with GE technology? Who has flown in an Air Plane? I bet if we added it up just with our small group the number would be in the tens of millions.

Oh but the advertising! Lets not forget about the advertising!!! So basically the argument is that the company advertising GE products is worth more than GE itself? Makes no sense.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Nobama

I take it you have a Facebook account. How much money have you spent on Facebook? I would like to extend that question to everyone on Calgarypuck. How much money has anyone spent on Facebook. I bet if we added it all up we couldn't even buy a Happy Meal.

Now lets ask the same question about GE. How much have we collectively spent on GE products or products with GE technology? Who has flown in an Air Plane? I bet if we added it up just with our small group the number would be in the tens of millions.

Oh but the advertising! Lets not forget about the advertising!!! So basically the argument is that the company advertising GE products is worth more than GE itself? Makes no sense.

Just because you don't understand something doesn't make it less real...

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Just because you don't understand something doesn't make it less real...

Instead of being snide, why don't you help him along by demonstrating your own deep understanding?

[heep223]

Originally Posted by Nobama

If you think a website should be worth more than General Electric then I would also like to show you a bridge I have for sale. Also I am offering the Statue of Liberty for half price today only.

I personally think that Facebook is probably overvalued and probably not suitable for most individual investors. However some exceptionally sophisticated investors own it, including AIMCO (Alberta's crown corp public investment company that owns 570,000 shares), CPP (Canada's largest investor, who owns 941,000 shares), BCIMC (BC's crown corp public investment company that owns 1.1M shares), Caisse de Depot (Quebec's crown corp which owns 1.4M shares), Norges Bank (entity that manages Norway's sovereign wealth fund which owns 15.3M shares), etc etc.

Your comments on how "wall street is laughing all the way to the bank", and implying that some concept of "them" is duping the rest of us by selling us some sort of fabricated story, is what I'm responding to. It's utter BS and just shows your lack of understanding of how capital markets function. I'm sorry to pick on you and I'm sorry for derailing this thread, but this is clearly something that triggers me when I see it because a lack of investor education is something that I see as a huge issue with my own generation (millennials). The lack of trust in financial markets and the financial system is understandable given what happened in 2008 and growing income inequality, but that doesn't change the fact that most young investors seem to want to remain ignorant and yet still spout off their opinions on the subject.

I won't respond further but I'll leave you with this, as a US investor if you bought Facebook the day it started trading publicly (May 18th 2012), which you can easily do through your discount brokerage account for $10 commission, you would have returned 252% over that period of time. If you're a Canadian investor, ie. if you also benefited from the USD appreciation over that time, you would have returned 355%.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by heep223

I personally think that Facebook is probably overvalued and probably not suitable for most individual investors. However some exceptionally sophisticated investors own it, including AIMCO (Alberta's crown corp public investment company that owns 570,000 shares), CPP (Canada's largest investor, who owns 941,000 shares), BCIMC (BC's crown corp public investment company that owns 1.1M shares), Caisse de Depot (Quebec's crown corp which owns 1.4M shares), Norges Bank (entity that manages Norway's sovereign wealth fund which owns 15.3M shares), etc etc.

Your comments on how "wall street is laughing all the way to the bank", and implying that some concept of "them" is duping the rest of us by selling us some sort of fabricated story, is what I'm responding to. It's utter BS and just shows your lack of understanding of how capital markets function. I'm sorry to pick on you and I'm sorry for derailing this thread, but this is clearly something that triggers me when I see it because a lack of investor education is something that I see as a huge issue with my own generation (millennials). The lack of trust in financial markets and the financial system is understandable given what happened in 2008 and growing income inequality, but that doesn't change the fact that most young investors seem to want to remain ignorant and yet still spout off their opinions on the subject.

I won't respond further but I'll leave you with this, as a US investor if you bought Facebook the day it started trading publicly (May 18th 2012), which you can easily do through your discount brokerage account for $10 commission, you would have returned 252% over that period of time. If you're a Canadian investor, ie. if you also benefited from the USD appreciation over that time, you would have returned 355%.

Yeah, but this isn't what he is saying - at least, I don't think it is.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by peter12

Yeah, but this isn't what he is saying - at least, I don't think it is.

I am all ears.

I will again pose this question to him:

"Or maybe I misinterpreted your definition of "Wall Street" (in referencing that Wall Street is laughing all the way to the bank)? Did you mean the investment bankers as I assumed, or did you mean the fund management companies who are buying this stock in their portfolios? Or the retail brokers who are generating a commission when your uncle buys the stock in his investment account?"

Happy to continue to engage on this, if mods are ok with this thread de-rail.