Today's Top 10 is a guest post from Selena Eaqub, an economist and co-author of Generation Rent - rethinking New Zealand's priorities. She has previously worked for Goldman Sachs JBWere, the Reserve Bank and Statistics New Zealand.
As always, we welcome your additions in the comment stream below or via email to david.chaston@interest.co.nz. And if you're interested in contributing the occasional Top 10 yourself, contact gareth.vaughan@interest.co.nz.
See all previous Top 10s here.
1. China at risk from housing bubble.
Beijing, Shanghai, Tianjin and Shenzhen property prices have been surging, and there are fears the market is overheated. For example, Shenzen is up 52% from March 2015 to March 2016. The increase comes in part from monetary stimulus that was supposed to support low growth areas. The stockmarket is not doing well so people with money are flocking to real estate.
There are worrying signs that there is a bubble, according to Bloomberg:
“An irrational and overheated sentiment have emerged in the Shanghai real estate market, and these sentiments have raised home prices," Han Zheng, the city’s Communist Party chief, said at briefing during annual legislative meetings in Beijing Sunday.
2. China’s growth target versus reality.
"China will absolutely not experience a hard landing,” said Xu Shaoshi, China’s top economic planner.
Yet data that came out in the weekend suggests the pressure is on to meet their bold GDP growth target of 6.5% to 7%. The components of the economy and the headline targets, which will be published, are far apart according to Bloomberg:
Industrial output rose 5.4 percent from a year earlier in January and February, the National Bureau of Statistics said Saturday, compared with the 5.6 percent median estimate of economists surveyed by Bloomberg. Retail sales climbed 10.2 percent from a year earlier, missing the 11 percent projected gain in the survey, while fixed-asset investment exceeded estimates with a 10.2 percent increase.
3. Lessons from Silicon Valley - fixing a housing crisis.
The Mountain View City Council has got it right in terms of fixing a housing crisis – they are building more houses.
Mountain View is similar to Auckland because it is spread out and is very car-centric. It is too late to build a major transport system like New York and London. Mountain View had a positive outcome because the people voted for pro-development councillors. Auckland has a complicated housing market. While building more houses alone won’t fix the housing crisis, Silicon Valley reminds us that we need to vote for development and not be overshadowed by the property-owning minority.
The story on Vox is worth a read:
Last week the city council in Mountain View, California, took a significant step toward addressing Silicon Valley's housing affordability crisis. According to the Mountain View Voice, the city council "largely gave a thumbs-up" to a new planning document for its North Bayshore district that envisions the creation of up to 10,250 units of high-density housing, though further review will be needed before the document is final. Mountain View only has about 32,000 households total, so that would be a substantial 32 percent increase.
The day after our own RBNZ surprised with a rate cut, the European Central Bank released a triple package: interest rate cuts, a quantitative easing package, and buying corporate bonds in an effort to stimulate the economy. But markets viewed this negatively, partly because they have less room to avert a disaster in future.
The Guardian writes:
The European Central Bank has pulled out all the stops to avert a dangerous deflation-trap, launching a blast of triple stimulus despite angry criticism from Germany that it is entirely unnecessary and will do more harm than good.
The markets reacted wildly to the package of measures, surging at first and then plummeting on creeping fears that the bank has exhausted its policy options and may be defenceless against a fresh shock.
5. Monetary policy reaching its limits.
The Reserve Bank of New Zealand cut the Official cash rate to 2.25%. It hasn’t shifted to negative like Japan and Europe, but going too low will need other measures to stimulate the economy. This article in the Guardian suggests the solution: fiscal stimulus. In NZ fiscal policy has been leaning against monetary policy in recent years.
The solution is straightforward. It is to fix the problem of deficient demand not by attempting to further loosen monetary conditions, but by boosting public spending. Governments should borrow to invest in research, education, and infrastructure. Currently, such investments cost little, given low interest rates. Productive public investment would also enhance the returns on private investment, encouraging firms to undertake additional projects.
6. Dairy – must add more value.
Sydney-based A2 Milk sells dairy products to China, the U.S. and U.K that's less allergic compared to your typical milk with the A1 protein. It makes sense because milk doesn’t suit everyone, particularly in China where dairy can be a new phenomenon for some.
Fonterra called this just a “marketing concept”. Maybe they could do a bit of “marketing” themselves if it gets double the price.
A2 Milk has been very successful in Australia:
Since its debut in 2003, a2 Milk has challenged the common wisdom in dairy retailing, grabbing almost 10 percent of the fresh milk market in Australia with a product that sells for about A$2.80 a liter ($2 a quart), more than double the price of regular house-brand milk.
7. IEA claims that oil has bottomed.
The International Energy Agency (IEA) reckons that oil has bottomed.
As a reminder, on February 9, the IEA said "supply may exceed consumption by an average of 1.75 million barrels a day in the period, compared with an estimate of 1.5 million last month." Curiously since then prices are far higher, and are now pushing into territory where even shale companies are considering resuming production.
As shown in the chart below, oil prices have recovered 50 percent from the 12-year lows reached in early February when news of possible oil production cuts by OPEC unleashed a dramatic rally; instead all that was unveiled was a tentative production "freeze", one which may never happen as Iran has sternly refused to comply with the term. This “freeze” which caps Russian and Saudi production at already record high levels, while currently supporting prices, is unlikely to have a substantial impact on markets in the first half of the year, the IEA said.
The world is getting used to record fatigue, where temperatures are constantly breaking records:
There are sure to be more climate records broken this year. But we treat them as we treat new fashions, phones or films. More novelty, newer features, more drama. We seem unable to understand that we are driving such changes. Record breaking changes that will ultimately break our civilisation, and so scatter all that we obsess and care about.
Chart from NASA.
9. How low-cost labour market information benefits job seekers.
This study finds that if you also look at complementary occupations when searching for a job, the number of interviews increases by 30%. Here are the results:
• We find that the suggestions alter the job search strategies of its users. Those who are offered the alternative search interface consider a set of vacancies that is broader in terms of the diversity of occupations, and they receive a 30% increase in job interviews.
• These effects are largest for job seekers that searched occupationally narrow in the first three weeks of the study.
• When they are exposed to the treatment from week four onwards, they increase their job applications by 30% and experience a 50% increase in job interviews (compared to similarly narrow searchers in the control group).
10. Computers predicting the future with tweets.
One tweet can have a massive impact on financial markets. To predict the future, some companies are building software to analyse tweets – much quicker than humans:
Sometimes a tweet can cost a lot. On Tuesday April 28 the content and media analytics firm Selerity released a tweet about Twitter’s earnings before they were public record. Six seconds later, Twitter’s shares plunged. According to analysts, high-frequency traders used this information leading to the deep and sudden decline of Twitter’s stock price…
Institutional players such as financial markets, security and crisis management, health industry and insurance companies have a particular interest on what is happening on social media. Companies such as Selerity and Dataminr are building software systems that comb through twitter data. These systems use algorithms and Natural Language Processing to analyze the content of tweets. What they are looking for from the data is the future.
63 Comments
The stockmarket is not doing well so people with money are flocking to real estate.
I suspect this sentiment exists in New Zealand too. I have never considered shares after what happened in '86.
The Mountain View City Council has got it right in terms of fixing a housing crisis – they are building more houses.
In light of the Retirement Commissioner Diane Maxwell advising that young people buy houses for their retirement I wonder if we should build humble pensioner flats that will have rent fixed to a percentage of the pension so that people need not feel it is absolutely necessary to have a house upon retirement. These flats could be all over the country enabling old folk to move around and enjoy their twilight years with some housing security.
This could take some heat off the housing market. Retired folk could even sell up and have quite an enjoyable retirement with cash to spend in the economy.
PS. It occurs to me that my pensioner flat scheme doesn't work very well alongside rampant immigration. Enhanced social welfare systems have proven to be a magnet for the entire population of the world "seeking a better life" - which is not surprising at all when you think about it.
Zach - please give yourself an uppercut. When we get back up off the floor, head to the nearest computer and research historical returns on stocks vs property.
It's quite possible (if not probable) that in 10 years from now people like you will be saying - 'I'll never invest in property because of what happened in Auckland in 2016'.
Stocks have always out performed property over the long term.
Yes, but the longer the term the clearer the distinction (thinking 30, 40, 50 - 100 years). Irrational Exuberance by Robert Shiller is worth reading and has some great charts and numbers around inflation adjusted indexes for both property and shares. Think google brings up some of his data.
It would make for very uncomfortable reading for some who are highly leveraged on property right now.
The Four Pillars of Investing has some of the most detailed statistics and teaches people how to invest. A good book but most people don't want to pay attention to actual performance. That said 1987 burnt a whole generation of potential investors. Plenty of people lost their houses in the madness, because getting a mortgage to invest in the stock market is a great idea.
Debt can leverage gains but also magnify losses. If I invest $50,000 in the share market that it the limit of my loss - if I invest $50,000 of my money (and borrow the rest) in a house the potential loss is far greater.
And in the end you can't take it with you.....
Also if you compare Govn bonds over a long time frame they do as well as shares I think. The thing is as someone said its moving between assets classes at the right time is what makes you the money.
The interesting thing now is not what will make you money but what will lose you the least IMHO.
The strange thing we're seeing in todays society, in countries like NZ and Australia, is that the events in the stock market like 1987, 2000 and 2008 have all caused investors who were hurt by stock market crashes to go to their 'safe-haven' investment which they call property. However the investor behaviour now towards property in places like Auckland and Sydney (which is crazy), is exactly the same as the behaviour that caused the stock market crashes in those 87, '00 and '08 years! The madness has just shifted from stocks to property. So it isn't really safe, in fact its probably worse than those other events because now investors are highly leveraged and they can't just sell their investments by making a phone call to the broker.
Currently, long term government bonds are dangerous - only suitable for those using other people's borrowed short term money.
Other things to avoid include high yield debt and "the seemingly momentum driven higher prices of Bunds and Treasuries that negative yields have produced," since "a 30 year Treasury at 2.5% can wipe out your annual income in one day with a 10 basis point increase." Read more
I know people who say the same about property after being caught in negative equity in the UK in the 80s/90s and still refuse to get involved. You're both wrong really, it's a good idea to have property and equity in your portfolio to avoid having all your eggs in the same basket. Shares tend to do better at a cost of higher volatility, but benefit from liquidity and transparent pricing.
For most home owners, I'd say this means they should favour the share market for further investments, as they're already heavily invested in property through their own home.
agree you need to diversify your investments so whats down will balance whats up and if done right more will be up , but most rental property investors only stick to property and have all their eggs in the one basket
me i have all sorts of investments from companies , to farms, to shares, to bonds, to commercial buildings.
would not touch rental housing returns are low and time spent on it is to high started out there learnt i could make more with less effort elsewhere without taking on loads of debt, the key is positive investing and concentrate on cashflow, GC is the cream on top
#1 this is proof that fiscal stimulus, be it QE or helicopter money or what ever, without direction will have unintended consequences, and people just won't always respond or react as you may expect or want them to. Time to give up the free market economy and introduce some regulation and control to establish stability.
#3 Jafas traditionally don't like developmentalist pollies. Biggest cluster of NIMBYs ever! Why should the rest of the country keep bailing them out? Auckland is a cancer on the country's economics!
#4 Govt regulation will get more results than tinkering on the edges of a free market economy. Unintended and unanticipated results will always rule! Time to give up the free market economy and introduce some regulation and control to establish stability.
#5 How will this create jobs and grow demand? It will raise expectations and unintended consequences.
#6 Added value has long been an argument, however some countries have regulated against importation of finished products - the wood/log market is a good example.
#8 most peoples' lifestyles are in denial about climate change despite what they recognise intellectually. The ETS will not work, but will benefit big players to avoid their impacts. Govts need to regulate to make things happen.
#10 Emotional responses to incomplete data - how is this different from computers managing when sells occur? That has caused some serious issues before.
nah, they'd land in Hamilton, Palmerston North or Wellington. The bottom line is Auckland expects the rest of the country to fund their infrastructure because they have chosen to put their head in the sand for too long. They have consistently been a drain on the country's funds not a benefit. they do not, and consistently refuse to pay their way, but claim they are essential to NZ's success. How? and what is the proof of this?
Really? Produce some figures that the tax take from Auckland that says that % wise they contribute more than the rest of the country? Some figures produced on this site a while back state that with 25% of th population, Ak only produced 20% of the wealth. If they pay their way, why then do they need to go to the central Government ffor help to fund their infrastructure? Living in the regions, having to pay for Jafaville is totally frustrating, and offensive!
I don't think many overseas visitors would land in Pamly or Hamilton given the choice. With over 1 million people working and paying tax which includes rates in Auckland I think they are paying there way.
In fact Auckland taxes has been paying for infrastructure for the rest of NZ for years, just think petrol taxes. Rather than head in the sand Auckland infrastructure spending has been ignored by successive governments for years, playing catch up will always be expensive. I dont see anyone complaining about taxes being spent in CHCH rebuild, even if its a waste of money. Suck it up and move on, better still go for a visit there one day you might actually learn something.
If the goal of the economy is to provide decent-paying work for everyone, that economy clearly isn't doing a good job at the moment. Real wages for most Americans haven't increased in 40 years. Real unemployment—which includes the "under-employed"—is above 10%. Many jobs are now part-time, flexi-time, or "gigs" with no benefits and few protections. And, we spend a lot of money to subsidize so-called "bullshit jobs": more than 50% of fast food workers receive some form of public assistance, for instance.
Read more
http://www.fastcoexist.com/3056483/welcome-to-the-post-work-economy?par…
Since about 1980 wages in the USA have barely moved in real terms. The wealth generated by increasing productivity has been syphoned into the pockets of the mega rich as per this very revealing link.
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2011/09/04/opinion/04reich-graphic.ht…
What it does not show is how many large costs have increased significantly, eg health, education and possibly housing. I suspect that the household surplus available to be saved or invested by the average family has gone significantly backward.
Note a two points.
1 The last time that the disparity between the rich and the rest of society got this high was followed the great depression and world war two.
2 Donald Trump has similarities to Adolph Hitler. It is not surprising that there are people like him around. What is surprising is that they have such popular support. As with Hitler this support is born out of total frustration by the general public. Hitler's movement did not succeed first time, but the seeds of discontent persisted and he eventually cam to power by a very small margin. That was all he needed.
Fooled by demographic changes and the make up of households changing over time. Do a bit more research before comparing people Hitler perhaps? "While it is true that median US household income has stagnated overall and fell by 4.5% (and by $2,300) between 2005 and 2014, the median income of married, two-earner households increased over that period by 4.7% (and by $4,500)."
http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/married.png
"According to these Census data, the shares of aggregate income going to the highest earning 5% and 20% of US households have been remarkably stable at about 22% and 50% respectively for more than two decades."
http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/incomeshares.png
Oh dear some more cherry picking on that graph? in the 1950s only the husband probably worked, today both now probably have to work.
Then we have to consider the data source which is libertarian by the look of it,
"Founded in 1938, AEI's stated mission is "to defend the principles and improve the institutions of American freedom and democratic capitalism—limited government, private enterprise, individual liberty and responsibility, vigilant and effective defense and foreign policies, political accountability, and open debate".[4] AEI is an independent nonprofit organization supported primarily by grants and contributions from foundations, corporations, and individuals."
So really what we (well I for one) do want to see is independent academic, peer reviewed papers in multiples and not what could easily be propaganda.
Ah yes i realised afterwards. What isnt stated however is any change in hours worked. ie are both adults working a) the same hours and b) like for like work. These days I'd suggest there are more professional women earning good salaries? are women working more full and less part time? not sure. Hence why I like to see academic papers as they explain all the corrections with sources.
Here is the data source here. Plot into excel and replicate the posted chart, no need to wait for a paper to come out.
https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/historical/household/
https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/historical/families/
You don't have to trust anyone - just use the census data. Broaden your mind before you compare people to Hitler. Poor left wing constructs that compare incomes over time but don't take in to account changing demographics are a tad lacking in the intellectual honesty department. Perhaps reading a book on Hitler and finding out what he got up to might help in your comparisons also.
https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/historical/household/
https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/historical/families/
Chris-M is right; It's a global economy!!!!! And if you'd like to listen to a more detailed version, I suggest you listen to the BBC's The Inquiry on Why Are Wages So Low?
No DFTBA you are thinking of rental houses versus owner occupied houses.
The statistic for people not houses is different. Basically 1/2 of adults in NZ over the age of 15 live in an owner occupied home((2/3 of homes) and 1/2 live in rentals (1/3 of homes).
In Auckland it is worse 57% live in rentals.
http://www.stats.govt.nz/~/media/Statistics/browse-categories/people-an…
Fig.s 19-21
Fig 16 is from the Census and is the result of asking if the house is an owner-occupied house or a rental house. So the question is about houses not people.
Fig 19-21 is also from the Census and it is from asking adults over the age of 15 whether they own or rent the home they are residing in. So the question is about people.
The difference in results indicates a lot more adults live in each rental house compared to owner-occupied houses.
This makes sense because there probably isn't many rentals with unoccupied bedrooms but probably a fair number of owner-occupied homes where there is.
So to sum up.
The majority of residences are owner-occupied homes not rentals -so you are correct about that.
But the majority of people (adults over the age of 15) live in rental accommodation -especially in Auckland.
Renters live in much less space, they are transient -tenancies change much quicker than home-ownership and there is some evidence that more of the older, colder, moldier housing stock is tenanted out. When surveyed, renters were much less satisfied with their life -especially if they had children.
You could say NZ is divided into a stable community of 'leafy suburbia types' who live in their own homes and are quite ok with the status quo. Life in NZ for them is good. Many of them do not get that there is another much grimmer side to NZ, in which half of NZ inhabits. They don't understand what life is like for renters. The lack of stability -constantly changing address, GP, schools, sports teams, community groups. The social expectation that they are a loser if they don't own a home -but the financial difficulty (Ponzi trap?) of achieving that.
if you check back on previous census you can see the decline in owner occupied housing verse the growing renter class. this has been accelerating over the last ten years and will lead to a lot of equality and social problem.
not to mention the future government expense which is only going to grow
Many of them do not get that there is another much grimmer side to NZ, in which half of NZ inhabits. They don't understand what life is like for renters. The lack of stability -constantly changing address, GP, schools, sports teams, community groups.
Renting is great. You get to move around easily. No worries about maintenance, rates etc. You often rent a house for less than the mortgage cost.
It occurs to me that what NZ needs to curb rampant house inflation is for the attitude you expressed to disappear. Those people who worry excessively about young people and the poor not being able to afford houses are worse than the speculators.
"8. February the hottest ever.", perfect example of the bare faced lie, "the warmest ever recorded by humans." was the statement made. This is why you get little reaction, why the cry of "Wolf" is no longer taken seriously. This is also why Donald Trump may yet be president of the US despite the torrent outrage and vilification directed at him by the corporate money controlled media. The media in general have sensationally misrepresented almost everything to the point that it is now not worthy of note or disregarded as the obvious work of shills. What goes around comes around and as the French revolution demonstrated, Those who have ridden high need to know they can be brought low when the people finally see the lies and realize their strength.
Indeed, the other day listened to a person (who I consider very sharp), discussing researchers and scientists and how they are drowned out and ridiculed constantly by "big money" - in the end they give up - and the lobbyists and PR machines win every-time - they know they will win - eventually
Last month was the warmest ever recorded by humans. I would even suggest that it was probably the warmest since humans left Africa.
Marcott et. al. 2013 suggests that the temperature in 2013 was probably the warmest it has been in the entire Holocene (11,700 years). The February 2016 anomaly is another step-change above 2013. The Pleistocene epoch before it was cooler than today.
..hottest ever or warmest ever. So whats the difference? I'd suggest the media is undereporting the issue of climate change if this is what you rant is about. Trump is a climate change denyer.....he prefers his own inner voice over science. That = one dangerous clown. He should never ever be allowed within a bulls roar of a nuke button. That aside, I understand why he has got where he has....politics have been stolen from the people.
Not quite there yet.... it's not about the climate and it's not about Trump. It is about the media presenting and distributing incorrect and misleading information handed to them in an attempt at skewing the tide of public perception for the benefit of those who pay them to do so. My point being that we, the public, have now come to be aware that this is so. As a result, we recognize that much of the presented information is unreliable and may be disregarded. Meaning, that what may have been worth bringing to the attention of the masses is lost in the dross. The headline states "ever", the article is quite clear "ever recorded by humans". And you fell for it.
The global climate has changed and this will continue to occur regardless of the drivers, it is still within the limits of what has happened before.
Trumps popularity is not about Trump, it is a protest vote against the thinly veiled machinery of corporate sponsored politics and their smiling, but pliable, frontmen/women.
I consider that a primary resource to give you all skills needed. There are shorter books he has written and various other resources. This is one of the few times I would ever link somethingawful with the long term and retirement thread. You may find a number of useful resources there.
http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=2892928
There are quite a few books listed there. Note that if the forum server is under heavy load it puts up the paywall. You don't need to pay just wait until the load subsides.
It's quite UK-centred, but this website has a huge amount of unbiased information http://monevator.com/investing-for-beginners-why-do-we-invest/
Everything about asset classes, constructing a portfolio, passive investing etc applies in pretty much the same way over here. Just don't get too depressed when you see how cheap the fees are over there compared to in NZ.
@ Kat,
I've read a few books but the ones I've listed below I found most worthwhile.
- Martin Hawes Investment Guide, & Timeless Rules for Investment Success (this would be a good starting point)
- Benjamin Graham 'The Intelligent Investor' (Graham was known as the father of value investing)
- 'The Warren Buffet Way' by Robert G. Hagstrom.
- 'Irrational Exuberance' (now at the Third Edition) by Robert Shiller (the guy is a bit of a genius)
- The Black Swan by Nassim Taleb.
- 'Thinking Fast and Slow' by Daniel Kahneman (relatively famous psychologist). This one is great because it shows you why/how people regularly make dumb decisions in life and with money.
- The Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell could be worth a look too. Gives an insight into human behaviour and why things go from being popular to unpopular (ie which can be related to market crashes when people no longer like something...like houses or shares).
- You may also want to look at some books by Eugene Farma who came up with the Efficient Markets Theory (trying to understand why markets behave they way they do). Although I don't 100% buy into this work and reading some of Shillers books will give you an insight into this.
Hope this helps.
Kat,
A long list,
Investing today is like no other in the past. Adverts fund this site. I figure I know why?, it pays.
But do not cross that off your list, it has its merits.
Some would say,you must be in debt up to your nostils...but a smile and a wave, can drown you in debt., an easy way to die, if you believe the Powers that be.
They are sold on it, as are Real Estate Agents.
I prefer otherwise. I prefer to avoid all issues. Just have a laugh. Especially Friday.
New Zealand is learning the hard way, that we are no different from the rest of the world, but the rest of the world thinks we are a safe haven.
We have more Banks per head of population than a Fraud Squad can actually handle.
When the 1% can outbid you, Corporatism can avoid taxes, Trusts can evade their responsibilities and money laundering is rife, you need a very special accountant and a specialist Financial Adviser and nerves of steal, not steel to keep up with them.
Banks have become the biggest problem in the world. Speculation is rife, not investing, per say as it used to be.
Bank robbing is now in reverse, not a crime, but an every day way of life.
And do not get me started on houses and the ploys in play at the moment.
America is in a financial war, nothing is what it seems to be and Russia and the Oil Nations are determined to join the fray.
Not wishing to be negative, Negative Interest rates and Leveraged longs and shorts are wearing a bit thin. Sub Prime has been exported and is now mandatory.
All because money is not real anymore and they all want to make a quick buck, but you cannot beat a computer at warp speed, nor a huge hedge to cut ones potential losses on exchange rates. Gold is up, down and non existent, mostly.
A jeweler once said on live TV in UK, who ever buys my crap products must be stupid.
He was a tad inebriated at the time.
But old jewelery and art can fetch a premium, cos money aint worth having, until you want to buy something on credit and put it on a credit card at 20% plus.
Oil used to be expensive, now it is cheap, but we pay the same,through the nose and put the car on the house to prove it can make us feel good driving a heap of tat.
And inflation is for pumping and dumping ones derivatives as we progress along merrily from pillar to post.
If you believe most of these people on here, with vested interests in their stance, including me, then seriously I suggest a lobotomy, because very few are solvent, even Land Banked people are doing the dirt on most of us, plus GST. Leveraged to the hilt, expecting a raise out of you and I. (Plus every Politician).
Some of my favourite links are below and as you may see, some are in the red one day, and in the green the next minute, depending on how the hedge and QE/NIRP/TWERP/JERK and maybe your KiwiSaver investers play the lottery.
But beware, things can change in a flash, a nanosecond, depending on a drop and toss of a coin. Even a Brexit and a Trump Card will cause people to run for the exits as fast as they damn well can arrange it, fees and taxes and rates, permitting.
http://finviz.com/futures.ashx
www.x-rates.com/calculator/?from=GBP&to=NZD&amount=1000000
And remember nothing is ever, ever Free, that includes water and fresh air.
You can still make money selling them, but they were once free as a bird.
Dick Smith made money with his name. Now it has been sold to the highest bidder, but the shops went broke, but he had nothing to do with it for 25 years.
A bit rich, but there you go.
An IPO is a gamble, Earn your money and learn the hard way.
Facebook sells nothing, but still people buy and sell their lives and souls on it.
Finally ..
Most people do not have to work, it is now called Socialism, Religion and Import, Export and huge, huge debt.
Some people are making a killing out of it. I am not at liberty to say....who.
The overheads are killing us, slowly, but surely.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.