A. You are assuming that 1. You got all the chips you paid for (would you sit there and count a million chips before playing?). 2. There are no rats to eat your chips. 3. You have no intention of diluting the chips before handing them over (i.e. handing over half a chip, and pretending to be Chinese). B. With the "pot" ETF, at delivery, had it been diluted with cow dung and hay, would you know about it until you took a whiff? ...and then who would you complain to? Elliot Spitzer! C. Which writer didn't write at Refco, or am I just dreaming? D. You need to watch Syriana: the only nuke that Kim has is the stale fart stuck in his rectum.
Actually... The EMH only applies to very liquid securities... Such as large cap stocks, and most commodity, future and options markets. A LOT of obscure or complex securities attract negligible interest... And are not priced very efficiently in the short term (hours or days). Otherwise I would not be outperforming the S&P 500... By 20% per year over 13 years... AFTER transaction and administration costs. My performance would be like 1,000,000 standard deviations away from mean. But in the longer term (months)... EMH applies to virtually all securities. rm+
Prove it. Prove what you say is true, because you know it isn't. You cannot prove it, yet reality suggests non zero sum. You keep repeating the same thing continuously, and no one every told you that futures and opitons trading isn't a game. It isn't a game.
And some makes money because of him: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/08...lance&n=283155&tagActionCode=totaliordendk-20
You do not have to prove the obvious. Futures (ie YM) is a zero sum game. Sellers equal buyers and vice versa. It is a game. There are players. I am a player.
Must be a positive sum game for the winners and a negative sum game for the loosers, thus zero sum overall.
Company A has IPO, issuing its stock at $5. Joe buys stock at $5 from Company A, then sells to Jane at $10. Jane sells to Jan at $15. Who loses?