The comments in this thread are basically a testament to how resilient stock prices can be of terribly run companies. ATT somehow has managed to mostly maintain their share price and some sort of mediocre returns (div) even after failing to execute a coherent strategy for over 20 years. Very bullish for the upcoming ATTs of the world (tech megacaps) and their current unquenchable desire to burn cash on capex moonshots.

---

Ben Felix has some excellent videos going over the research about these particular concerns with ETFs. He also does point out that certain ETFs aren't great (e.g. sector ETFs, themed ETFs, etc...). But there are some videos that look at the inclusion bias specifically and also some of the inefficiencies generated by the way they rebalance. All that said, ETFs do better than the vast majority of investors in the long run (even ETF investors due to poor investor behavior, Morningstar has some interesting reports on this comparing the return of the ETF with the return of the average investor in the ETF... some people just can't seem to buy an hold, indeed, people that forget about their investments do better than average). Warren Buffet won that bet for a reason. The math does pan out for broad ETFs being less risky (e.g. not areas that are all closely correlated, like themed ETFs), adding diversification in general does. "Some of the best investors are not experts, they are people who buy good companies and hold for a very long time or forget they ever bought that company until years later." But you cannot know what the "good companies" are a priori. Most of us don't have that detailed level of access to a company to know how things are on the ground, and if we did we might be at risk of insider trading. You're effectively saying that we say lucky gamblers are good gamblers because they got lucky... But in reality, there is such a thing as a skilled gambler and they DO NOT do what you suggest. What they actually do, is they place a lot of bets at the appropriate size, e.g. look into things like the Kelly Criterion. There is also a very good video I saw recently on Veritassium about power laws that is quite applicable. Yes, the S&P500 is being driving by a handful of companies, but you couldn't have known a priori which would be those winners. If stock returns on companies follow a power law... the optimal strategy is again to make lots of smaller bets. There are of course also some factors that predict returns if we know them, these have been described in 'factor models' of stocks, but once you've picked the ones that are good by those metrics... what blows up and what doesn't is difficult to predict. All that said... this is WSB and the crowd want me to shut up and for both of us to play some options... which I don't do... I'm mostly here because I can't take my eyes off the train wreck, not to drive headlong in it.

---

ETFs are boring, very bearish, and a bore. I need the drama that individual stocks bring me.

---

>Not saying they are all pedos of course, but don't be dumb enough to let your supervisor assign you to report to a school if you are a sex offender holy shit. I work in a lot of schools and I have never submitted a background check. It's very odd that nobody cares about this. Not a pedo so would be happy to take a background test, and I get mine renewed all the time for work purposes anyways. It would be super easy to submit it...

---

I love the name, POET is a great ticker symbol. That said, I personally don’t see enough right now that would attract me to buy. It doesn’t mean it won’t work out eventually; no one really knows how these things evolve. They’re still in research mode, and they’re losing around $10M each quarter.The technology is definitely interesting, but they’re up against very big competitors like Broadcom and Intel. And with a company burning roughly $40M a year while sitting at around a $200M market cap, the numbers just don’t line up for me at this stage. I’m keeping an open mind, but for now, it’s simply not for me, at least yet, in 2-3 years., maybe.

---

Bro lol Very 🌊 🌊 🌊

---

I've read A LOT of scientific journal articles in my career, and this is very very far from something that looks publish-able. I'll admit I don't understand much of the subject matter, but good papers, especially ones purporting extraordinary breakthroughs, make things easy to understand, not difficult. This paper has grandiose claims amid an unending avalanche of poorly defined variables and boderline-pretentious, often misleading vocabulary. It would shock me to see this work published in any reputable journal. To be honest, it looks \*designed\* to be difficult to follow, making me think its either written by someone with no experience in academia, or its completely bullshit. Considering the only link of the single author is to a twitter account that has only 4 posts (all of which were made in the last hour), I would bet a lot of money that this is complete nonsense, and probably ai generated

---

They are going to run Adesa into the ground. Maybe not very soon but soon enough

---

If it spikes a great deal VERY soon, they could sell it off before September.. My hope is that they don’t end up breaking even and then losing money the longer they hold.

---

I've never missed a payment across multiple cards and accounts for 20 years. I also have a very low credit usage percentage. My credit score is pretty good too. Honestly it's more than I comfortable with. I treat my credit cards like debit cards and have all my cards set to automatically paying the full amount every month.

---