|
Damnit I should have done that 
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 23:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 21:01 |
|
|
New markets : Merkel remains through 2016, OPEC lowering targets by June 30, and Venezuelan recalls
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
Oh man Rand Noes aren't nearly as cheap as they were last time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 01:23
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:Oh man Rand Noes aren't nearly as cheap as they were last time. When the market opened I gobbled up all the Huckabee YES when it was sub-20s and sold it all in the 30s. I really don't expect him to maintain 37 cents a YES but I do expect he'll be next to duck out. I'll be back in that for some YES when it dips.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 01:30
|
|
|
This is a ways off and it seems foolish to sink cash into it now, but the Will GOP Win the White House in a Landslide (370+) seems like easy money once the nominees are set. It's currently at .90 for NO, but I can see that dropping down to 70 or so after the conventions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 01:31
|
|
|
Peachstapler posted:That's me. But in all fairness I'll let you in on my other angle: Carson NO. The guy is woefully disorganized right now, but because of the fourth quarter fundraising he'll have the money to go ahead to Super Tuesday. So at 80, 81, 82-cents a NO I'm grabbing a few. Why is he any more likely than Santorum?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 02:01
|
|
|
A Time To Chill posted:I put in an offer for 0.29 then went to bed assuming the swings were over. But lol no it went through and the shares were worth 0.60 when I woke up. That's awesome! I was too chicken. I've discovered that I am more motivated by not losing vs winning big. I don't know if that is a good thing or a bad thing. I am looking forward to playing the next to drop out market. Get ready for panic swings every time someone gets the flu and cancels an event, adjusts their ad purchases, or when Bill Kristol says something. Ultimately it will probably be Santorum or Huckabee since they are counting on Iowa.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 02:17
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:Why is he any more likely than Santorum? Santorum isn't far behind. He obviously has a money problem as well, but he had such a successful 2012 primary I just don't see him bolting the scene yet. He loves to go on about how a candidate should put the message first and worry about everything else second even if they have to get by on a shoestring budget. For those reasons he'll linger until after Huck calls it quits. I'd really love to see some hard 4th quarter numbers to see how bad things are for these two.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 02:23
|
|
|
I got in big @ 24¢ on DPRKNUKE2016.NO. I saw some shares sell as low as 20¢, but it looks like I did well. I’m reasonably confident the market will resolve to “NO” on December 31, so I’m not worried about losing my shirt, but it would be great if the market settled at 10¢/90¢ like DPRKNUKE15 did when there wasn’t a panic. There’s a lot of the year left during which NK could ostensibly test an H‐bomb, but if anything DPRKNUKE16 is less likely now than DPRNUKE15 was at the end of last year. It had been a long time since their last test. Imagine if this test had been pulled forward by a week and had been successful. It could have happened. But whatever NK detonated yesterday—boosted fission test or a fizzled H‐bomb—this suggests that they’re going to be at their drawing boards longer than twelve months. Of course, there are a lot of people holding cheap “NO” that want to cash out, and that will keep the market down for a while regardless of the growing consensus that the detonation was not of an H‐bomb. And even though I’m confident it really wasn’t an H‐bomb, there’s some small risk in the particular wording the CTBTO uses and in interpretation by PredictIt, and the price will reflect that for a couple of months. Platystemon has issued a correction as of 02:51 on Jan 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 02:49
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:I got in big @ 24¢ on DPRKNUKE2016.NO. I saw some shares sell as low as 20¢, but it looks like I did well. Yeah I'm gonna wait a week or two before cashing out. Basically cash out and wait for another media panic to buy back in again.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 04:43
|
|
|
I have a sell order in at .89. edit lol at "Is North Korea Telling the Truth?"
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 07:24
|
|
|
New report from daily beast today with exposed emails looks pretty bad for Rahm. Price for resignation still in the low 20s if anyone wants to bet that this'll blow up in the coming weeks... I'm not convinced this actually changes anything, and he's already committed to staying on, but an interesting turn. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/06/exclusive-lawyers-went-to-rahm-then-quashed-the-laquan-mcdonald-video.html http://www.salon.com/2016/01/07/rahm_emanuels_smoking_gun_why_a_new_bombshell_could_end_his_career_for_good/
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 19:14
|
|
|
FYI: CTBTO will begin to sniff radiation from the nuke test "as early as Friday AM."
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 10:13
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:FYI: CTBTO will begin to sniff radiation from the nuke test "as early as Friday AM." So that’s what’s driving the price up. Spoiler alert: they won’t announce anything for at least a month.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 13:02
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:So that’s what’s driving the price up. Could be next week. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CYMrWXXWYAADTN4.png
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 16:54
|
|
|
Puerto Rico is pretty likely to declare bankruptcy, or at least undergo some sort of financial restructuring, this year, so 25c on Yes seems like a pretty good bet to me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 21:37
|
|
|
Stereotype posted:Puerto Rico is pretty likely to declare bankruptcy, or at least undergo some sort of financial restructuring, this year, so 25c on Yes seems like a pretty good bet to me. I don't know poo poo about that situation how do you know it'll be likely?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 22:45
|
|
|
Necc0 posted:I don't know poo poo about that situation how do you know it'll be likely? They're currently defaulting on monthly debt obligations; if the US economy hits the skids this year, PR could be hosed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 23:03
|
|
|
Man I feel like the "will Trump sweep the first 4 states" market is a solid no, can't imagine why anyone would be saying yes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
All right I did it, in for 500 - okay goons, what's the quickest way to double my money.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 23:22
|
|
|
pathetic little tramp posted:All right I did it, in for 500 - okay goons, what's the quickest way to double my money. Quick, go to the Obama poll!
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 23:30
|
|
|
watwat posted:Quick, go to the Obama poll! Hahaha I saw that. My strategy is actually to buy a bunch of YES in whatever position came in second for next week's obama-poll market. Without a doubt there's always some random-rear end spike where you can pull in 5 cents profit a share while people run around frantic-as-hell.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 23:32
|
|
|
Stereotype posted:Puerto Rico is pretty likely to declare bankruptcy, or at least undergo some sort of financial restructuring, this year, so 25c on Yes seems like a pretty good bet to me. Puerto Rico seems like old guy who is in and out of the hospital, takes 12 drugs for his 5 chronic diseases, is on oxygen and still smokes. You know he's going to go, it could be quick, but then again he's been like that for years. fishmech posted:Man I feel like the "will Trump sweep the first 4 states" market is a solid no, can't imagine why anyone would be saying yes. He probably won't but would be an interesting hedge for my Cruz Iowa Yes. Zeta Taskforce has issued a correction as of 23:49 on Jan 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 23:43
|
|
|
Bevy of new polls came out from Fox News, bad news for Christie nationally, but he's looking better in IA and NH. The Obama poll market was fun this week when the latest fox news poll killed the 45+ people dead at the last minute.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 00:13
|
|
|
pathetic little tramp posted:Bevy of new polls came out from Fox News, bad news for Christie nationally, but he's looking better in IA and NH. Huh? Christie only got 5% in NH! Disaster for him, good for Rubio (15%) Also, on Puerto Rico, some basic googling in the past makes it clear that it's not as simple as it seems. Yeah they're out of $, and probably would have declared already, but the market rules are very specific for Chapter 9 Section 11 BK filing, which is currently not a legal option for states/territories. There is a bill that Obama's backing going through congress now to try to give PR the ability to use it, but I have no clue what the politics are, if it'll get held up by the GOP, if it's imminent, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
Really lucky my Christie shares sold sometime last night, almost got toasted by that poll. Instead I managed to buy and flip every single Christie 5% no share on the market, which was fun.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 00:31
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:Really lucky my Christie shares sold sometime last night, almost got toasted by that poll. Instead I managed to buy and flip every single Christie 5% no share on the market, which was fun. Thanks fer buyin my NOs! (And subsequently making a profit on them yourself, win win!) thethreeman posted:Huh? Christie only got 5% in NH! Disaster for him, good for Rubio (15%) I thought Christie was at 5% before, so he was at least staying steady. My apologies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 00:35
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:Really lucky my Christie shares sold sometime last night, almost got toasted by that poll. Instead I managed to buy and flip every single Christie 5% no share on the market, which was fun. With how low volume some of these markets still are I bet there's a lot of opportunity to manipulate markets but I wouldn't know the first thing in how to actually do that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 01:03
|
|
|
Necc0 posted:With how low volume some of these markets still are I bet there's a lot of opportunity to manipulate markets but I wouldn't know the first thing in how to actually do that. I think it would be easier to flood comments sections with links to bullshit speculative articles under multiple accounts. Basically, get people hyped up for something and buy the opposite in small panics.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 01:51
|
|
|
Stereotype posted:Puerto Rico is pretty likely to declare bankruptcy, or at least undergo some sort of financial restructuring, this year, so 25c on Yes seems like a pretty good bet to me. Puerto Rico is legally ineligible to declare bankruptcy. You're not betting on them being in a lovely financial situation, you're betting on Congress changing the law.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 03:32
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Puerto Rico is legally ineligible to declare bankruptcy. You're not betting on them being in a lovely financial situation, you're betting on Congress changing the law. Yup. Hint: Congress won't do poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 04:32
|
|
|
watwat posted:Yup. Hint: Congress won't do poo poo. This neo-liberal rag disagrees http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21685453-congress-should-allow-puerto-rico-declare-bankruptcy-bill-will-come-due
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 04:52
|
|
|
Zeta Taskforce posted:But NH will stay crowded, the establishment candidates will split the vote, and 30% will be enough for him to win. Aliquid posted:NH splitting the GOPe vote between Christie, Kasich and Bush would be The Chaos Scenario New Fox News has Trump up by 18. PPP poll has 6 candidates in double digits and Trump up by 14. Anyone else betting on The Chaos Scenario?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 05:01
|
|
|
Stereotype posted:This neo-liberal rag disagrees Puerto Rico statehood 2016?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 06:39
|
|
|
Analyst wisdom says Trump Iowa is slightly overvalued and Cruz slightly undervalued, but you have to remember who you're dealing with. If I was betting I'd never mess with any markets that Trump affected.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 07:03
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:Analyst wisdom says Trump Iowa is slightly overvalued and Cruz slightly undervalued, but you have to remember who you're dealing with. If I was betting I'd never mess with any markets that Trump affected. This is my policy as well. Trump hasn’t obeyed conventional wisdom in the past. It’s lunacy to expect him to behave it in the future. Someone out there is right about Trump, but probably not the analyst aggregate.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 07:16
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Puerto Rico is legally ineligible to declare bankruptcy. You're not betting on them being in a lovely financial situation, you're betting on Congress changing the law. Also here is an article on why Ryan will probably push to grant PR bankruptcy protections. http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/congress-action-puerto-rico-debt-crisis-217474 Hint: It's because he hates the Freedom Caucus. The only other thing Congress can do is bail them out. They literally cannot pay their debts, at some point bankruptcy is better for monied interests than them just refusing to pay any banks. Nothing will probably happen for another two months (March 31st is the "deadline"), but I bet a ton of articles will come out between then and now, pushing the price up. Hell, its up 5c since when I posted it at first.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 11:08
|
|
|
Stereotype posted:This neo-liberal rag disagrees That article says they should, not that they will. I think there is a reasonable chance Congress actually manages to pass a bill, but it's just important for anyone speculating in that market to know exactly what they're betting on - not Puerto Rico's finances, but the ability of Congress to perform a basic task everyone sees is necessary without seizing up and failing to do anything.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 18:58
|
|
|
Managed to get 400 shares of Bush making the next major debate at 95c a pop. Slow and steady.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 21:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 21:01 |
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:Managed to get 400 shares of Bush making the next major debate at 95c a pop. Slow and steady. Doesn't the way the fees work mean you don't make any money off those?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2016 21:24
|
|