Insider trading has been rife on Wall Street, academics conclude

Re:Insider trading has been rife on Wall Street, academics c... by 11thEarlOfMar on Sunday February 11, 2018 @07:24PM (#16355633)

>> In order for you to win someone else has to lose.

Please explain why this is necessarily true in the stock market.

You buy X at $Y. Then sell X to me for $Y+1. You won.

I then sell X to someone else for $Y+2. I won.

Hence in that transaction, we both win.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Insider trading has been rife on Wall Street, academics c... by ceejayoz on Sunday February 11, 2018 @09:50PM (#16356180)

Which of the two transactions you described is the win-win?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Insider trading has been rife on Wall Street, academics c... by 11thEarlOfMar on Sunday February 11, 2018 @11:13PM (#16356479)

They are both win-win, even if the wins are not simultaneous.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Insider trading has been rife on Wall Street, academics c... by ceejayoz on Monday February 12, 2018 @09:27AM (#16358729)

Sure, if you ignore the impact on the third party you've introduced.

That's like calling a pyramid scheme a win-win-win-win-win-win-OHFUCK situation.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Insider trading has been rife on Wall Street, academics c... by 11thEarlOfMar on Wednesday February 14, 2018 @11:46PM (#16381972)

I see your point.

However, there are outcomes where I buy a stock and hold it. The company's profits increase over time. They start paying dividends, and I never sell. There are many companies that generate enduring profit and thereby enable win-win.

[ Parent | on HN ]