Quote:
Originally Posted by maniac_73
Actually it sounds like an excellent response from someone with life experience that isn't swayed by what Gary Vee is telling people to buy this week,
|
No, it's not. It's mostly conjecture.
I'm not going to break it all down, because that would take forever. But a couple of highlights: the lack of enough intrinsic value does not mean that something is not an "investment". Many collectibles, including comic books and baseball cards, have had a generally strong and liquid market for at least 40 years now. Anyone not categorizing goods like those as investments being highly unrealistic.
Sure you could lose your shirt if something highly unexpected goes really wrong. Just like you if you bought GE stock in the last 20 years (which was considered for decades to be the hallmark of a "safe", low risk stock of an impenetrable conglomerate behemoth). Or if you ventured into the restaurant business and that new place went belly up.
And yes, I know, diversification and the long term returns of the overall stock market. But tell me how your stock portfolio did if you needed to grow you money from 1930 to 1950. Or from 1960 to 1980. Even if you could count on the future results of the market being as amazing as the last 100 years overall (which you can't, or even close), there could easily be long problematic periods that ruin your expectations.
Anyway....there is nothing wrong at all with conflating hobby and investment. And that's how many of them function, regardless of what anyone's opinion is.
But there's a lot wrong with categorizing all these different ventures that fit the conventional wisdom of "investment" as rock solid ideas that could never hurt you that badly, while brushing off other ideas that not even be any riskier in the end.