https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/10/not-even-s...

Pls watch the front part of the interview.

Host: "What's the likelihood of a 2H sell off"
Kristina Hooper: "I think it's less than 50%, but I wouldn't be surprised to see a significant sell off in the 2H"

Host: "Exactly how steep do you think, can we quantify it some way?"
Kristina Hooper: "I think we could see another about 10% sell off, and it could happen relatively quickly, or it could be a bit more gradual this time"

.....................................WTF.
THIS is exactly what TTI always rants about.

Hello lady, if u are investing your own money, there's no instrument that huats when the "less than 50% sell off" doesn't materialize, and also huats "when the not so surprising sell off" comes too.
I hear a lot of words coming out from her mouth, all of which are useless.

I wish my job is this easy.
Patient: "Doc! What's the likelihood my cancer spreads?"
TTI :"I think it's less than 50%, but I wouldn't be surprised to see a significant metastasis in the next month"
Patient :" Shit! Exactly how long will I live?"
TTI: "I think the cancer cells could spread relatively quickly and you'd be dead in 1 week, or it could also be a bit more gradual this time and you could be still alive in 10 years."

And you wonder why I'm never wrong.

Read more
15 likes 26 comments
kc2024

The Singlish reply.
Ans 1: dunno leh.
Ans 2: dunno leh.

ThumbTackInvestor

Reply to @kc2024 : End off with Ans 3: Huat la!

Then CNBC will never ever ask u back again

bgting

Hmm ... for her case, she could have come up with the probabilities and magnitude base on some financial models. There could be ways to buy " insurance" against such outcome or bet on it.

For for you medical case, I don't think you can bet on the patient's outcome? LOL

For those who likes to read, a bit of history
Gambling is a feature of capitalism—not a bug - John Kay
It has always been part of financial markets, from their origins in 17th-century coffee houses to the Great Crash of 2008
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazin...

An interesting passage :
"The first insurance policies were fire and marine, but the scope of the industry extended to life insurance with the development of actuarial science, the gathering of accurate statistics from which life expectancy could be assessed. In the mid-17th century, John Graunt had constructed the first mortality table by inspecting burial records. But it was not until the following century that the ultimately ill-fated Equitable Life Assurance Society was founded, “equitable” because its premiums were calculated on actuarial principles. In contrast, in the coffee houses, gentlemen with little interest in mathematics took bets on when the king would die, and whether Admiral John Byng would be executed.

Aside from being distasteful, this wagering was dangerous. How would you react if your neighbour bought insurance on your life, or against your house burning down? In 1768, the London Chronicle thundered that “when policies come to be opened on two of the first peers in Britain losing their heads and on the dissolution of the present parliament within one year… it is surely time for the administration to interfere.”

The administration did indeed interfere. The courts established the doctrine of uberrima fides—an insurance contract was void unless the insured had declared everything that might be relevant to the other party’s assessment of the risk. And legislation created the concept of “insurable interest,” whereby you could take out insurance only if you would suffer some demonstrable loss, financial or emotional, from the event against which you sought to insure; thus saving you from the temptation of assassinating your neighbour in order to benefit from insurance. The law sought to draw a line between insurance, based on economic interest, and wagering for amusement. It was important, and a natural consequence, that insurance contracts were legally binding, but wagers were not. An English gambling debt was a debt in honour only, enforceable only by social convention—or private force. Such provision remained part of English law until 2005—only then did bets at William Hill become legally binding."

bgting

Reply to @wellhandy : Come to think about it, maybe she's trying to sell portfolio insurance? :-)

  View More Replies Small loading
wellhandy

i'm no expert, does a long straddle with some customization work?
http://www.theoptionsguide.com/long-stradd...

Evilcrownofthorns

Hmmm that’s how my usual medical visit goes too. Lol

IAmPatrick

Flip prata is not a Indian specialize skill only

ThumbTackInvestor

Reply to @IAmPatrick : This one is not flip parts...
This one is cover all sides of the pears first
Later don’t even need to flip
It’s a whole new level altogether

RotiBlata

Kallang bridge can also form holes .. careful when crossing .. hehehe

Zumou80

Reply to @Master_GongJiaowei : Well when your main rice bowl is gathering more money to manage, its important to present an image where you are never wrong. Being precisely vague is a skill too.. haha oh and.. if u are a very good money manager, trust me, you don’t want to waste time on TV and your boss won’t force u to go either. So.. take the words of the talking heads on TV w a massive pinch of salt.

  View More Replies Small loading
SilosInvestor

Eh... I always thought you are in dentistry!

SilosInvestor

Reply to @ThumbTackInvestor : Just like Kristina's commentary? hahaha

  View More Replies Small loading
Spinning_Top

Huh...Answer like no answer?

ThumbTackInvestor

Reply to @Spinning_Top : This lady's answering powress makes Trump look like a genius.

slapmeplease

Wa TTI go talk btr! She is useless!

View More Comments (1) Small loading

There are more for you ...

View more and participate in our discussion now. It's FREE.

Creating an account means you’re okay with InvestingNote's Terms and Conditions