2019年12月31日 星期二

[2019閱讀書單]

2019前半年都在準備CFA level 1, 所以沒看甚麼書. 

2019年12月28日 星期六

[平台經濟] "Platform Capitalism" 一書重點摘要


這本書很薄, 加上之前看過了相關的書, 就覺得這本書中的重點沒那麼多好記錄的了......

[平台經濟] “Matchmakers: The New Economics of Multisided Platforms” 一書重點摘要


平台經濟(platform economy)聽起來好像是個當代的產物.  雖然經濟學家從1970年代開始對平台經濟認真做起了研究但其實這種經濟模式的運作已經有幾百年甚至幾千年的歷史了呢很不可思議嗎? Not really.

2019年12月20日 星期五

Morningstar: 10 Wide Moat Stocks of the Year


我喜歡買大型股, 覺得抱起來很心安, 在研究上花的時間也比較少(CP值很高). 但我也喜歡研究中小型股, 喜歡看著他們成長&磨練自己挑股的功力&長知識. 所以我取得的平衡就是, 把戶頭分幾個, 然後某些專買大型股, 某些專買中小型股. 

2019年12月17日 星期二

軟體產業歷史 (from "Secrets of Software Success")

這段歷史, 值得留下&做分享. 不過只記錄到20年前. 

"Secrets of Software Success"一書 重點整理 (軟體產業)

科技將來會觸及到所有的產業中(就如同書上寫的"software is increasingly becoming one of the key enablers of other industries), 所以如果要拓展能力圈, 那考慮軟體業似乎是必要的了. 

這次看了麥肯錫在20年前出的, 關於如何在軟體業成功的書"Secrets of Software Success", 學到了很多. 也很慶幸自己選股時, 也有把重點放在管理階層上, 才有好成果(Microsoft, Adobe.)  

雖然是20年前的書, 但我想有些產業文化與大方向還是沒變的, 還是值得一看. 以下是重點整理(有些章節跳過沒看). 

2019年12月13日 星期五

[Barron's] UP AND DOWN WALL STREET 12.13.2019

Christmas came early for the stock market, as many of investors’ wishes for greater clarity in a highly uncertain world were granted.

2019年12月12日 星期四

"Confessions of a Street Addict" 裡, 關於1987黑色星期一的描述

這幾段寫的挺好, 也有些重點可以觀察. 

附上一則新聞: 

復盤1987年美國股災:崩盤前夜發生了什麼?


"Confessions of a Street Addict"一書中的精采摘要

喜歡投資, 原因之一是一路走來, 遇見了很多聰明的前輩與股友. 跟他們交流&學習, 是件很過癮的事情, 而透過這種刺激, 也覺得alive(有活著), 也會期許自己能越來越聰明&越有智慧.

Jim Cramer就是一位聰明的前輩. 哈佛法學院, 後來進入高盛, 聰明的他, 靠著投資累積了財富, 所以他的書當然要拜讀一下.


他並不是一般投資人眼中的大師, 但看他的書, 卻能夠補足那些大師級書中所沒有的實戰經驗

這本"Confessions of a Street Addict"(簡體字版本翻"一個華爾街癮君子的自白". 此書並沒有繁體中文版), 是他早期的作品, 可以看到他早年的投資風格. 他對華爾街的詭譎多變爾虞我詐, 也有精彩的描述. 我是把這本當小說在看.  

以下是"Confessions of a Street Addict"一書中的精采摘要. 

"Confessions of a Street Addict" 裡面很有感的幾段

太懶了. 就直接用照相的方式來分享. Will history repeat itself? Of course. 


2019年12月6日 星期五

Barron's UP AND DOWN WALL STREET 12.06.2019: Stocks Jump on Strong Job Gains, Easing Worries About a Trade-Induced Recession

There are weeks in which whole market cycles seem to take place, to paraphrase Lenin. And after what appeared at the time to be a steep slide at the beginning of the week, stocks reversed and rallied vigorously in the final two days to wind up not far from where they had ended the previous Friday.
While equities reeled early in the week, President Donald Trump declared, “I don’t watch the stock market,” contrary to his many tweets touting records set by the major indexes since he has been in the White House. “Jobs are what I watch,” he added, quite presciently, as it turned out, when the Department of Labor on Friday morning delivered boffo employment numbers for November.
Nonfarm payrolls jumped by 266,000, nearly 100,000 more than economists had forecast, and there were upward revisions totaling 41,000 for the previous two months.
Returning General Motors (ticker: GM) strikers accounted for 46,000 of November’s gain. The headline unemployment rate ticked down a tenth, to 3.5%, the result of a rather tepid 83,000 increase in the separate survey of households and a smaller, 40,000 rise in the labor force.
The labor-force participation rate among prime-age workers (those 25 to 54 years old) remained at a 10-year high, notes Cornerstone Macro, and that has kept wage inflation in check, with average hourly earnings rising at about a 3% annual rate, despite the jobless rate falling back to the 53-year low previously touched in September.
Prime-age workers, however, lagged behind in finding jobs, according to TLR on the Economy, accounting for 37% of employment gains in the past year, far short of their 64% share of the population. Meanwhile, age and treachery (as playwright David Mamet once put it) beat out youth and exuberance again, as workers over 55 accounted for 50% of the job gains in the past year, twice their share of the population, another example of the divide seen across demographic groups that could play out in the political season.
For markets, the jobs data dispelled worries about a trade-war-induced recession. At the start of the week, the hostilities escalated with levies on steel and aluminum from Brazil and Argentina because of the depreciation of their currencies. And Trump said that he could wait until after next year’s elections to finish the phase-one trade deal with China.
But the talks reportedly were still on later in the week. Not that this skinny pact would mean that much, but bulls hope the talks would stave off the more important matter of 15% tariffs on $160 billion of Chinese goods, set to take effect on Dec. 15. Remember that the stock market’s current run took off after Trump said on Oct. 11 that only some details needed to be finalized for the phase-one deal to be concluded.
On that date, the Federal Reserve also announced its program to provide increased liquidity to the economy via repurchase agreements and Treasury bill purchases. While the Fed insists that this isn’t quantitative easing, the extra liquidity certainly has helped fuel the 7% advance in S&P 500 index since then. Some observers liken these injections to those made ahead of Y2K. Of course, none of the much-ballyhooed effects on computers of the year-end 1999 calendar turnover materialized, but some observers hypothesized then that the Fed helped pump up the dot-com bubble with its extra liquidity.
No further moves are likely when the Federal Open Market Committee meets on Tuesday and Wednesday. Indeed, odds favor the central bank’s federal-funds target range holding at the current 1.50% to 1.75% through at least the first half of next year, if not all of 2020. That could be confirmed by the FOMC’s dot-plot graph of committee members’ guesses for the coming year. The most recent projections, released after the Sept. 17-18 gathering, still had a median projection of fed-funds hikes by 2020’s end.
“Markets are still pricing in one final 25-basis-point cut sometime next year, but our guess is that signs of a pickup in economic growth early next year will take that possibility off the table,” writes Paul Ashworth, chief U.S. economist for Capital Economics. The bigger point is that interest-rate hikes also are unlikely, even if growth surprises to the upside, especially in an election year, notwithstanding Fed officials’ insistence that politics don’t matter, he adds. A lack of rate increases wouldn’t displease Wall Street or the White House, however.
Source: