🌻上周六的估值會議影片, 已經將part 1上傳至YouTube. 股友分享的case study之後會再分享:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvSFMAKkOo8
謝謝參與的股友們!
🌻整理了一下最近的一些市場狀態(from WSJ):
1. S&P 500很安靜; 從去年10月後, 就沒有超過5%的修正.
(上次SPY那麼安靜, 是在2017時(那時候的安靜期也比現在長), 接下來在2018就有一個劇烈的修正).
2. Russell 2000盤整了一段時間
-->有可能是之前漲多了(或是投資人在觀望經濟前景?); 財報好的話, 或許能繼續推升(the outsize earnings growth by small-caps is expected to continue throughout the year, with Russell 2000 profits projected to more than quadruple (四倍) from a year earlier in the third quarter, while S&P 500 earnings rise above 25%).
The Russell 2000 traded at the end of June at 17.7 times its projected earnings over the next 12 months, compared with 21.5 times for the Russell 1000 large-cap index, according to BofA Global Research.
Analysts at RBC Capital Markets said in a recent research report that small-cap stocks have tended to outperform large-caps when economic growth is above its long-term average. That is expected to be the case this year and next, but potentially not in 2023, they wrote.
“Small-caps being more sensitive to economic acceleration, as that slows down, I think the relative attractiveness of small-caps will subside a little bit,” said David Joy, chief market strategist at Ameriprise Financial Inc.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/small-stocks-look-to-extend-winning-streak-11625650200
3. TINA(there is no alternative to stocks)
因為低利率以及紓困案, 資金充裕, 跑到股市, 但因投資人對經濟前景的不確定性(可能也加上散戶投資人資金充沛), 導致類股輪動劇烈(sharp & swift), 也導致成長股與價值股的正相關性變低(近期兩者是同時在漲)(“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market buy not a lot of volatility of the market.”)
4. 而上周的Fed會議紀錄, 也顯示出官員們開始debate何時要做資金退場的動作.
Fed的動作, 以及接下來的財報季, 會給投資人一個方向. 也要注意labor market(“It hasn’t made enough progress” for the Fed to pull back on stimulus programs”).
5. 目前的一些問題: Delta variant, labor shortage, bottleneck(供應鏈), etc.
🌻Q3的財報季要開始了. 本周由銀行股打頭陣. 附上本周發表公司財報一覽表.
🌻有不少年輕世代, 會利用交友軟體, 來找普通朋友, 不是用軟體來找對象.
In a recent survey of more than 300 members of Generation Z aged 16 to 24 in the U.S., 35% said they have used dating apps to make platonic friends over the past 12 months, according to OnePulse, a consumer insight app and web portal, which conducted the poll for The Wall Street Journal. Nearly 27% said they used dating apps to make friends because they were lonely in lockdown. More women than men—39% vs. 29%—said they used dating apps to make platonic friends.
Looking for a Friend Without Benefits? Try Match, Bumble and Tinder.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/looking-for-a-friend-without-benefits-try-match-bumble-and-tinder-11625675336
Picture: Feeling agitated. 被關了一年多, 其實最想去的地方之一, 是美術館, 或是博物館. 在YouTube上看影片的感覺, 就是跟現場親臨不一樣. Anyway. 從今天開始, 我會把之前從museums拍到的一些照片在這邊分享. 也算是做個回憶. 下面這張是Washington D.C.的National Art Gallery所珍藏的Magnolia: https://www.nga.gov/collection/art-object-page.93464.html
同時也有10000部Youtube影片,追蹤數超過2,910的網紅コバにゃんチャンネル,也在其Youtube影片中提到,...
「the rise of street art」的推薦目錄:
- 關於the rise of street art 在 貓的成長美股異想世界 Facebook 的精選貼文
- 關於the rise of street art 在 元毓 Facebook 的最讚貼文
- 關於the rise of street art 在 NYDeTour Facebook 的最佳貼文
- 關於the rise of street art 在 コバにゃんチャンネル Youtube 的最讚貼文
- 關於the rise of street art 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的精選貼文
- 關於the rise of street art 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的精選貼文
- 關於the rise of street art 在 Rise Street Art Hotel - Home | Facebook 的評價
- 關於the rise of street art 在 The Banksy Interviews: Creating A Street Art Revolution 的評價
- 關於the rise of street art 在 20th Century Graffiti - The Rise of Graffiti Art | Widewalls 的評價
the rise of street art 在 元毓 Facebook 的最讚貼文
根據計算,100萬人遊行隊伍要從維多利亞公園排到廣東;200萬人遊行則要排到泰國。
順道一提香港15~30歲人口約莫100出頭萬人。以照片人群幾乎都是此年齡帶來看,兩個數字都是明顯誇大太多了。
另一個可以參考的是1969年的Woodstock Music & Art Fair,幾天內湧進40萬人次,照片看起來也是滿山滿谷的人。(http://sites.psu.edu/…/upl…/sites/851/2013/01/Woodstock3.jpg)
當年40萬人次引發驚人的大塞車,幾乎花十幾個小時才逐漸清場。
而香港遊行清場速度明顯快得多。
順道一提,因此運動而認定「你的父母不愛你」的白痴論述也如同文化大革命時的「爹親娘親不如毛主席親」般開始出現:
https://www.facebook.com/SaluteToHKPolice/videos/350606498983830/UzpfSTUyNzM2NjA3MzoxMDE1NjMyMTM4NjY3MTA3NA/
EVERY MAJOR NEWS outlet in the world is reporting that two million people, well over a quarter of our population, joined a single protest.
.
It’s an astonishing thought that filled an enthusiastic old marcher like me with pride. Unfortunately, it’s almost certainly not true.
.
A march of two million people would fill a street that was 58 kilometers long, starting at Victoria Park in Hong Kong and ending in Tanglangshan Country Park in Guangdong, according to one standard crowd estimation technique.
.
If the two million of us stood in a queue, we’d stretch 914 kilometers (568 miles), from Victoria Park to Thailand. Even if all of us marched in a regiment 25 people abreast, our troop would stretch towards the Chinese border.
.
Yes, there was a very large number of us there. But getting key facts wrong helps nobody. Indeed, it could hurt the protesters more than anyone.
.
For math geeks only, here’s a discussion of the actual numbers that I hope will interest you whatever your political views.
.
.
DO NUMBERS MATTER?
.
People have repeatedly asked me to find out “the real number” of people at the recent mass rallies in Hong Kong.
.
I declined for an obvious reason: There was a huge number of us. What does it matter whether it was hundreds of thousands or a million? That’s not important.
.
But my critics pointed out that the word “million” is right at the top of almost every report about the marches. Clearly it IS important.
.
.
FIRST, THE SCIENCE
.
In the west, drone photography is analyzed to estimate crowd sizes.
.
This reporter apologizes for not having found a comprehensive database of drone images of the Hong Kong protests.
.
But we can still use related methods, such as density checks, crowd-flow data and impact assessments. Universities which have gathered Hong Kong protest march data using scientific methods include Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, University of Hong Kong, and Hong Kong Baptist University.
.
.
DENSITY CHECKS
.
Figures gathered in the past by Hong Kong Polytechnic specialists using satellite photo analysis found a density level of one square meter per marcher. Modern analysis suggests this remains roughly accurate.
.
I know from experience that Hong Kong marches feature long periods of normal spacing (one square meter or one and half per person, walking) and shorter periods of tight spacing (half a square meter or less per person, mostly standing).
.
.
JOINERS AND SPEED
.
We need to include people who join halfway. In the past, a Hong Kong University analysis using visual counting methods cross-referenced with one-on-one interviews indicated that estimates should be boosted by 12% to accurately reflect late joiners. These days, we’re much more generous in estimating joiners.
.
As for speed, a Hong Kong Baptist University survey once found a passing rate of 4,000 marchers every ten minutes.
.
Videos of the recent rallies indicates that joiner numbers and stop-start progress were highly erratic and difficult to calculate with any degree of certainty.
.
.
DISTANCE MULTIPLIED BY DENSITY
.
But scientists have other tools. We know the walking distance between Victoria Park and Tamar Park is 2.9 kilometers. Although there was overspill, the bulk of the marchers went along Hennessy Road in Wan Chai, which is about 25 meters (or 82 feet) wide, and similar connected roads, some wider, some narrower.
.
Steve Doig, a specialist in crowd analysis approached by the Columbia Journalism Review (CJR), analyzed an image of Hong Kong marchers to find a density level of 7,000 people in a 210-meter space. Although he emphasizes that crowd estimates are never an exact science, that figure means one million Hong Kong marchers would need a street 18.6 miles long – which is 29 kilometers.
.
Extrapolating these figures for the June 16 claim of two million marchers, you’d need a street 58 kilometers long.
.
Could this problem be explained away by the turnover rate of Hong Kong marchers, which likely allowed the main (three kilometer) route to be filled more than once?
.
The answer is yes, to some extent. But the crowd would have to be moving very fast to refill the space a great many times over in a single afternoon and evening. It wasn’t. While I can walk the distance from Victoria Park to Tamar in 41 minutes on a quiet holiday afternoon, doing the same thing during a march takes many hours.
.
More believable: There was a huge number of us, but not a million, and certainly not two million.
.
.
IMPACT MEASUREMENTS
.
A second, parallel way of analyzing the size of the crowd is to seek evidence of the effects of the marchers’ absence from their normal roles in society.
.
If we extract two million people out of a population of 7.4 million, many basic services would be severely affected while many others would grind to a complete halt.
.
Manpower-intensive sectors of society, such as transport, would be badly affected by mass absenteeism. Industries which do their main business on the weekends, such as retail, restaurants, hotels, tourism, coffee shops and so on would be hard hit. Round-the-clock operations such as hospitals and emergency services would be severely troubled, as would under-the-radar jobs such as infrastructure and utility maintenance.
.
There seems to be no evidence that any of that happened in Hong Kong.
.
.
HOW DID WE GET INTO THIS MESS?
.
To understand that, a bit of historical context is necessary.
.
In 2003, a very large number of us walked from Victoria Park to Central. The next day, newspapers gave several estimates of crowd size.
.
The differences were small. Academics said it was 350,000 plus. The police counted 466,000. The organizers, a group called the Civil Rights Front, rounded it up to 500,000.
.
No controversy there. But there was trouble ahead.
.
.
THINGS FALL APART
.
At a repeat march the following year, it was obvious to all of us that our numbers were far lower that the previous year. The people counting agreed: the academics said 194,000 and the police said 200,000.
.
But the Civil Rights Front insisted that there were MORE than the previous year’s march: 530,000 people.
.
The organizers lost credibility even with us, their own supporters. To this day, we all quote the 2003 figure as the high point of that period, ignoring their 2004 invention.
.
.
THE TRUTH COUNTS
.
The organizers had embarrassed the marchers. The following year several organizations decided to serve us better, with detailed, scientific counts.
.
After the 2005 march, the academics said the headcount was between 60,000 and 80,000 and the police said 63,000. Separate accounts by other independent groups agreed that it was below 100,000.
.
But the organizers? The Civil Rights Front came out with the awkward claim that it was a quarter of a million. Ouch. (This data is easily confirmed from multiple sources in newspaper archives.)
.
.
AN UNEXPECTED TWIST
.
But then came a twist. Some in the Western media chose to present ONLY the organizer’s “outlier” claim.
.
“Dressed in black and chanting ‘one man, one vote’, a quarter of a million people marched through Hong Kong yesterday,” said the Times of London in 2005.
.
“A quarter of a million protesters marched through Hong Kong yesterday to demand full democracy from their rulers in Beijing,” reported the UK Independent.
.
It became obvious that international media outlets were committed to emphasizing whichever claim made the Hong Kong government (and by extension, China) look as bad as possible. Accuracy was nowhere in the equation.
.
.
STRATEGICALLY CHOSEN
.
At universities in Hong Kong, there were passionate discussions about the apparent decision to pump up the numbers as a strategy, with the international media in mind. Activists saw two likely positive outcomes.
.
First, anyone who actually wanted the truth would choose a middle point as the “real” number: thus it was worth making the organizers’ number as high as possible. (The police could be presented as corrupt puppets of Beijing.)
.
Second, international reporters always favored the largest number, since it implicitly criticized China. Once the inflated figure was established in the Western media, it would become the generally accepted figure in all publications.
.
Both of the activists’ predictions turned out to be bang on target. In the following years, headcounts by social scientists and police were close or even impressively confirmed the other—but were ignored by the agenda-driven international media, who usually printed only the organizers’ claims.
.
.
SKIP THIS SECTION
.
Skip this section unless you want additional examples to reinforce the point.
.
In 2011, researchers and police said that between 63,000 and 95,000 of us marched. Our delightfully imaginative organizers multiplied by four to claim there were 400,000 of us.
.
In 2012, researchers and police produced headcounts similar to the previous year: between 66,000 and 97,000. But the organizers claimed that it was 430,000. (These data can also be easily confirmed in any newspaper archive.)
.
.
SKIP THIS SECTION TOO
.
Unless you’re interested in the police angle. Why are police figures seen as lower than others? On reviewing data, two points emerge.
.
First, police estimates rise and fall with those of independent researchers, suggesting that they function correctly: they are not invented. Many are slightly lower, but some match closely and others are slightly higher. This suggests that the police simply have a different counting method.
.
Second, police sources explain that live estimates of attendance are used for “effective deployment” of staff. The number of police assigned to work on the scene is a direct reflection of the number of marchers counted. Thus officers have strong motivation to avoid deliberately under-estimating numbers.
.
.
RECENT MASS RALLIES
.
Now back to the present: this hot, uncomfortable summer.
.
Academics put the 2019 June 9 rally at 199,500, and police at 240,000. Some people said the numbers should be raised or even doubled to reflect late joiners or people walking on parallel roads. Taking the most generous view, this gave us total estimates of 400,000 to 480,000.
.
But the organizers, God bless them, claimed that 1.03 million marched: this was four times the researchers’ conservative view and more than double the generous view.
.
The addition of the “.03m” caused a bit of mirth among social scientists. Even an academic writing in the rabidly pro-activist Hong Kong Free Press struggled to accept it. “Undoubtedly, the anti-amendment group added the extra .03 onto the exact one million figure in order to give their estimate a veneer of accuracy,” wrote Paul Stapleton.
.
.
MIND-BOGGLING ESTIMATE
.
But the vast majority of international media and social media printed ONLY the organizers’ eyebrow-raising claim of a million plus—and their version soon fed back into the system and because the “accepted” number. (Some mentioned other estimates in early reports and then dropped them.)
.
The same process was repeated for the following Sunday, June 16, when the organizers’ frankly unbelievable claim of “about two million” was taken as gospel in the majority of international media.
.
“Two million people in Hong Kong protest China's growing influence,” reported Fox News.
.
“A record two million people – over a quarter of the city’s population” joined the protest, said the Guardian this morning.
.
“Hong Kong leader apologizes as TWO MILLION take to the streets,” said the Sun newspaper in the UK.
.
Friends, colleagues, fellow journalists—what happened to fact-checking? What happened to healthy skepticism? What happened to attempts at balance?
.
.
CONCLUSIONS?
.
I offer none. I prefer that you do your own research and draw your own conclusions. This is just a rough overview of the scientific and historical data by a single old-school citizen-journalist working in a university coffee shop.
.
I may well have made errors on individual data points, although the overall message, I hope, is clear.
.
Hong Kong people like to march.
.
We deserve better data.
.
We need better journalism. Easily debunked claims like “more than a quarter of the population hit the streets” help nobody.
.
International media, your hostile agendas are showing. Raise your game.
.
Organizers, stop working against the scientists and start working with them.
.
Hong Kong people value truth.
.
We’re not stupid. (And we’re not scared of math!)
the rise of street art 在 NYDeTour Facebook 的最佳貼文
即使是在芬蘭灣海上,也是要來NYDeTour週末何處去~
3/8-3/9 (Sat & Sun)
*3/9 (Sat) Making Brooklyn Bloom at Brooklyn Botanic Gaden
對園藝有興趣的朋友,星期六在Brooklyn Botanic Garden的Palm House有一場曾經參加Greenest Block in Brooklyn 社區綠化活動者的經驗分享。也有機會認識紐約市裡多個綠化組織,了解關資訊。到連結網站下載活動海報就可以免費入場。
地點:Palm House of Brooklyn Botanic Garden, 1000 Washington Avenue, Brooklyn, NY
時間:3/9 (Sat) 10am-4pm
https://www.bbg.org/visit/event/making_brooklyn_bloom_2019
*3/9 (Sat) Ethereal Makers Market
星期六在Garment District有一個專屬亞裔美國人的手作市集,有手工藝,食物攤位以及舞蹈讀詩音樂等表演活動。可以看看亞裔手作工作者如何榮辱東西方文化在他們的作品上面。
地點:342 W. 37th Street, New York, NY
時間:3/9 (Sat) 11am-10pm. 6:30pm前免費入場,之後8元。
https://www.facebook.com/events/2456668951014668/
*3/9-3/10 (Sat & Sun) Highline Open Studios
星期六日是Highline以及West Chelsea開放工作室日。有興趣的朋友可以先到508 & 529 W. 26th Street拿今年參與開放工作室的地圖,再前往各工作室參觀。
地點:Various locations in Chelsea (508 & 509 W. 26th Street, New York)
時間:3/9-3/10 (Sat & Sun) 12pm-6pm
http://highlineopenstudios.org
*3/9-3/10 (Sat & Sun) Grunge: Rise of a Generation Photography Exhibition
你曾經是90年代Grunge Music的樂迷嗎?Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Sound Garden, Alice in Chains….即日起到3/31在Morrison Hotel裡的藝廊有以90年代Grunge Music為主題的攝影展。有興趣的朋友可以去回味一下!
地點:Morrison Hotel, 116 Prince Street, 2nd Fl, New York.
時間:3/8-3/31 12pm-6pm
https://www.morrisonhotelgallery.com/blog/2KuWkK/GRUNGE
*3/10 (Sun) Annual St. Patrick’s Opening Day at Irish Arts Center
慶祝St. Patrick’s Day星期天Irish Arts Center有一連串慶祝表演活動。有傳統愛爾蘭舞蹈,音樂表演外,也有愛爾蘭藝術家的展覽以及Soda Bread的教學。是認識愛爾蘭文化很棒的活動。
地點:Irish Arts Center, 553 W. 51st Street, New York, NY
時間:3/10 (Sun) 12pm
https://irishartscenter.org/event/annual-st-patricks-open-day-2019
*3/10 (Sun) Second Sundays Open Studios at Pioneer Works
星期天是在Red Hook的Pioneer Works藝術中心的每月第二星期天開放工作室日。除了可以參觀駐村藝術家的工作室和他們作品外,也有現場音樂表演以及互動節目。很酷的活動。
地點:Pioneer Works, 159 Pioneer Street, Brooklyn, NY
時間:3/10 (Sun) 4pm-9pm
https://pioneerworks.org/programs/second-sundays-march-2019/
*3/9-3/10 (Sat & Sun) Armory Week 2019
這週末有多場Armory Week相關的藝術展覽,包括在Pier 90, 92 & 94的The Armory Show還有在Hudson Yards的Clio Art Fairs以及聯合國廣場的Spring/Break Art Show。有興趣的朋友可以到連結網站查詢各展覽資訊。
地點:Various Location
時間:3/9-3/10 (Sat & Sun)
https://hyperallergic.com/487783/your-concise-guide-to-armory-week-2019/
Have a great weekend, my friends!
the rise of street art 在 コバにゃんチャンネル Youtube 的最讚貼文
the rise of street art 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的精選貼文
the rise of street art 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的精選貼文
the rise of street art 在 The Banksy Interviews: Creating A Street Art Revolution 的美食出口停車場
Banksy, the world's most infamous street artist, whose political art, criminal stunts, and daring invasions outraged the establishment and ... ... <看更多>
the rise of street art 在 20th Century Graffiti - The Rise of Graffiti Art | Widewalls 的美食出口停車場
Dec 19, 2016 - The 20th century GRAFFITI ART and its rise - a look at some of the prime artists in the development of writing that turned street art into ... ... <看更多>
the rise of street art 在 Rise Street Art Hotel - Home | Facebook 的美食出口停車場
Situated in the heart of the city of Larnaka, The Rise Street Art Hotel is a level 5-minute walk from the famous Phinikoudes Beach front, ... ... <看更多>