« Bubbles and Fundamentals | Main | Participatory Governance »

October 06, 2008

Comments

Chris Ward

With 'random' diversification (of your portfolio), you tend to end up competing against yourself; or lending to an institution who then ends up lending back to you (and I think you can assume the institution will take a commission on the turn. They are businesses, after all).

So it may be better to 'take a position' with a personal investment portfolio.

How to do it safely and productively, accepting the level of risk you are comfortable with, and with confidence in your counterparty ?

Gold may be safe; but you cannot eat it, and it does not pay a dividend.

Penelope Non

What I find unacceptable is diversification based on hope rather than a solid reason). http://business.blogtells.com/2008/10/06/resolution-is-non-rational/

Armen Hovanessian

This sounds like you are claiming that spliting a big company into smaller parts does NOT make sense EVER! Is that the intention?

Chris Ward

It's probably that a big company won't want to be split up. I think IBM likes being an integrated hardware-software-services business; I think Microsoft likes being a Windows-and-Office business; and I think America has no interest in splitting into Confederates and Yankees at the Mason-Dixon Line.

Now, whether it ever has to split, like ATT into the Baby Bells, is another matter entirely.

But by choice it won't want to.

linfordeng

level possibly measurements medium fuels ces joint respect

The comments to this entry are closed.