SoTier
-
Posts
5,020 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by SoTier
-
-
Contrary to the headline, these days $125k is a pretty paltry purse for a stakes races. On the same day as the Los Alamitos Derby, there were at least 7 stakes races run around the country worth at least $250k, topped by the $1 million Belmont Derby and the $700k Belmont Oaks Invitational (which are both run in New York where Baffert can't run his horses). On Sunday, Belmont ran 3 non-stakes races with purses over $90k each. Churchill Downs, which finished its meeting a week ago or so, has a purse structure similar to the big NY tracks Aqueduct, Belmont, and Saratoga.
-
16 minutes ago, TBBills said:
More reasons why social media should be regulated. Too much false information around, this all started about 2016 and has gotten worse every year.
Poor guy like poleshifter gets false information from amateur YouTube videos and fake Twitter posts and think it's real. Then he invests all his money into it all the while not realizing his information is bad.
It's not social media that needs to be regulated but cryptocurrencies to limit the exposure of all investors to shady practices. Other than that, all the "good" information in the world isn't going to deter people who view investments as get-rich-quick schemes because those people only listen to what supports their schemes and dismiss warnings about the risks.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Glad you had a good time!
-
4 hours ago, BillsFan4 said:
Afaik XRP is not backed by gold. There are some coins that are, but XRP isn’t one of them. In fact, I believe Ripple’s (the company that made XRP) CTO David Schwartz even said if XRP was backed by gold it would limit its capabilities.
Here’s a list of all the current gold backed crypto:
https://www.goldscape.net/gold-blog/gold-backed-cryptocurrency/
XRP not an asset backed cryptocurrency at all. It’s not really backed by anything but the company that made XRP (ripple), who’s currently facing an SEC lawsuit over what XRP actually is. The SEC is alleging that XRP is a security (not a commodity) so it should be regulated like a security, and that all XRP is currently considered unregistered securities so ripple’s owners sold it illegally.
ripple says XRP is a utility coin.
https://www.protocol.com/fintech/ripple-sec-xrp-lawsuit-trial
and here’s more on asset backed cryptocurrencies:
https://medium.com/the-capital/what-are-asset-backed-cryptocurrencies-f341d9359292
https://www.softwaretestinghelp.com/gold-backed-cryptocurrency/#What_Is_Gold_Backed_Cryptocurrency
Thanks for the links.
If I understood the article on asset backed cryptocurrencies correctly, they don't seem to be quite ready for prime time investing by John Q Public. While they offer more stability than other cryptos, they still have some significant problems that make them much riskier than more traditional investments. At present, the advantages of asset backed cryptos -- namely, the ability to buy tiny shares of expensive assets and the ease of liquidity -- can be had by individual investors using traditional investment vehicles like mutual funds that invest in assets like real estate or precious metals, so asset backed cryptos seem to be redundant and riskier.
-
4 hours ago, Poleshifter said:
XRP is backed by gold. XLM is backed by silver.
Gold and silver are the assets.
Most people are not accustomed to crypto being backed by anything but hope.
^^^
4 hours ago, Warcodered said:And you can't just invest in gold or silver? Why do you need an extra step?
Crypto mining techies aren't going to make quick fortunes investing in gold and silver. They will make big $$$ selling their versions of crypto to the "world economy is going to tank tomorrow" crowd who wouldn't be interested in "mainstream" crypto like Bitcoin.
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, Warcodered said:
The insolation from typical dangers because of modern technology/civilization makes people really stupid sometimes. I mean cows kill people every year and that's a species we've bred to be livestock.
My guess is that even more people are killed -- and certainly injured -- by horses, which were likely the second species that humans domesticated after the dog, sometime more than 5000 years ago, and have been used all that time as close partners to humans.
17 hours ago, Limeaid said:I used to go Erie County Fair regularly and there were a pair of bison there in a corral for a few years.
I'd top by the agricultural building each day and pick up vegetables left behind after contest and take bag full to bison.
After the first night they would recognize me and one would stamp his fore log like a horse and other would stick out lounge waiting for me to feed them.
They liked broccoli and leafy greens the most but would eat carrots, squash, green beans and most of the other non-acidic produce (no tomatoes) and when in mood would eat apples and pears.
Both of them would let me bet them afterwards with them looking to see anything left in bag.
On second trip back someone was refilling hay and water and he told me not to get to close for sometimes they had bad temper.
The male then turned his head and stuck in over corral towards me.
I scratched it on side of neck and it just stuck its tug out like a dog and moved tail.
His response "I have never seen him act like that" and then pointed to sign saying caution.
After he left I fed them the second load of vegetables which did not win any prizes.
Those days I was planning to go to college to be a vet.
It did not work out but when young I took every opportunity to interact with and care for animals.
Raising domestic bison for meat (and hides, I suppose) used to be popular. There was a big bison "ranch" out by Salamanca/Ellicottville in Catt County, and bison meat could be found in supermarkets. I visited with my stepmother. They used railroad ties as fence posts and industrial sized metal gates. I think they didn't herd them much but called them in with food. People never got into the pens with them (like they sometimes do with cows) but moved and/or separated them using chutes.
-
Large or venomous snakes, like many other exotic animals that some people think are "cool" to make into pets, should be left in their native habits because they can become dangerous as adults, primarily because of size and/or temperament. Once these animals become habituated to and dependent upon humans, they can rarely be returned to the wild and always have to live in captivity for their own safety and for the safety of people who cross their paths. Too often, when the animals become problems for their owners, they get dumped.
Many exotic pets are collected illegally from the wild and smuggled into the US without regard for the animals' health or the possibility of spreading disease. The only way to truly stop this illegal trafficking is to dry up the market so that it's not worth it to smugglers to bring the animals into this country.
Hopefully this snake is an escaped pet that can be reunited with its owner.
-
One attraction that hasn't been mentioned is the Erie County Fair in Hamburg for about 10 days in mid/late August. It's one of the largest county fairs in the US (I think that Los Angeles County Fair may be larger) and is larger than some state fairs. It has a massive midway, top grandstand shows, all kinds of shows, exhibits, and/or demonstrations -- conservation, historical, agricultural, and cultural.
-
2
-
1
-
-
22 hours ago, KDIGGZ said:
I was painting with a broad brush to make a point. Sure it is speculation but Bitcoin specifically is no more risky than a piece of art or an expensive piece of sports memorabilia. Like any such commodity (notice I didn't say currency), you need a buyer on the other end for it to be worth something. I can scribble on a piece of paper and it's worth nothing and Josh Allen can scribble on a piece of paper and it's worth potentially hundreds of dollars. Is the utility of his ink more impressive than what I produced? Or is it equally worthless but certain buyers are willing to give it a high value because they find it desirable to own?
With Bitcoin there is a set amount of only 21 million and many thousands if not millions have already gone missing. There's 8 billion people in the world. If more and more people decide to buy, whether as a commodity, a currency, a hedge, or whatever, at some point people will have a harder and harder time getting someone to sell to them and then we are in a supply/demand situation.
I personally see it as digital gold. The next guy might see it as better than USD (inflation anyone?) and easier to transact with online (internet/metaverse). And yet another person might see it as just something rare to collect. When I see people say it has no utility I laugh because it is more useful than most things people buy.
The difference between gold and "digital gold" is that gold has a track record; it's been desirable for at least five thousand years. As long as others view crypto as "digital gold", your investment has value. If too many others decide that something else is the new "gold" digital or otherwise, crypto may go the way of the Dutch tulip in the 17th century.
-
5 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:
No disrespect but hard disagree. I’ve done this, my friends and family have done this, and many of the wealthiest people I know have done this. I’ve never met a wealthy person who didn’t name real estate as the most secured investment.Real estate is a safe and wise investment. Doesn’t mean you can’t still make dumb decisions. Like with anything else, you can still do it wrong and make mistakes.
But intelligent real estate investment can’t be beat in terms of security. And when you pay cash for property your holding costs are minimal because you have no mortgage expenses. The real estate disasters you speak about generally come with over extending yourself or buying foolishly. People can’t handle the holding costs. But when you’re buying $250,000 SFR in all cash, your taxes and insurance are minimal and maintainable if there are any gaps in your rents. And if you have long gaps in renters, you either bought in a terrible location or you need to fire your property manager. And if you’re the property manager, you definitely need to fire the property manager and hand it over to a professional.
$5M will get you 20 SFR at $250K each. Places I would buy them would easily rent at $1500+ a month. That’s $30k a month in passive recurring income. Forever.
Additionally, if you buy them distressed and remodel then your portfolio value will already be 20-40% higher the moment the first renters move in.
It’s not hard, it really isn’t.
I'm not against investing in rental real estate but it does have risks like all investments. No matter how good your property is, you cannot dismiss the reality that tenants can be problematic. They may suffer economic reverses of their own which can make formerly top rated tenants unable to pay their rent. Certainly a house fire could easily keep your house empty for months and probably cost you tens of thousands in repairs beyond whatever insurance covers. A tornado can level even the best built and maintained house or apartment building.
2 hours ago, GoBills808 said:Does that 30k even cover payments on a $5M note and assuming no repairs and 100% occupancy the entire time
No investment is perfect for everyone or without risk. It's best to spread your investments among various types of investments.
-
14 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:
There is only one investment you ever put a large portion of your net worth into…and that’s real estate. It’s forever, there will never be more, and it will forever go up in value, even after it dips during recessions.
Why these dumb idiot athletes invest in anything else is beyond me. He could have put $10M into rental properties, paid cash, let a company manage the tenants and renters, and collected easily be generating $60k-$80k a month in rents for life all free and clear with no mortgages while his property portfolio value would continue to climb over time.
Its so easy it’s sickening to see athletes go broke. Even when property values decline, rents stay the same. It’s the easiest mail box money in the world, and it’s why the 1% club of the wealthiest people mostly built that wealth on real estate.
This is a very simplistic view of investing for building wealth. Contrary to your rosy scenario, there are numerous pitfalls in real estate investing, not the least of which is that real estate is perhaps one of the most difficult assets to liquidate. It's also prone to disastrous hazards that can wipe out most of the investment in minutes: fires, earthquakes, floods, etc. Real estate investors also have expenses that simply don't apply to stocks or crypto or precious metals, namely they have to maintain their properties even when they aren't bringing in rents. IOW, investing in rental real estate has some real drawbacks and not for everyone.
Your observation about the 1% club isn't correct. Making great fortunes in real estate generally involves speculation or the development of real estate rather than long term ownership of residential or commercial units for rental income.
-
1
-
1
-
-
18 hours ago, What a Tuel said:
Whats the advantage to being paid in crypto as opposed to being paid in usd and then buying crypto with it? Isnt it taxed as income either way?
Maybe the dude has abandoned all financial transactions based on USD. Probably not the wisest move since crypto isn't accepted for most ordinary purchases.
-
8 minutes ago, Captain Hindsight said:
Darnold is a "can do" QB. meaning he can make all the throws and looks the part. But he is extremely careless with the football and that hasn't changed since his rookie year. His first throw was an across the body pick 6!
Darnold is awful. Jets were really smart to move on. Whether or not Wilson works out is another story, but people loved to bash on Gase (and not without merit) but Darnold did himself no favors
I agree. I remember that pick six -- it was just like so many of his picks in college. Whether carelessness or poor vision, Darnold isn't good enough to be a NFL QB not only because the talent level in NFL is much higher than in college, but also because the talent between the best teams and the worst teams is miniscule compared to the talent differences between top collegiate teams and bottom collegiate teams. There are no Ball States or Western Michigans or UBs for the top tier teams to fatten up on in the NFL.
-
12 hours ago, Limeaid said:
I agree he currently sucks. It takes longer to recover from pounding he got as a JEST and it takes time to unlearn everything he learned.
This made it a bad deal for Carolina. Darnold needs to be backup on a team with a good coaching staff and some work during off season as well.
Sorry but Bills slots are full unless he wants to sign on practice squad.
Darnold was the one QB from the 2018 draft that I absolutely didn't want the Bills to draft because his college game had a couple of big red flags despite his stats and publicity: he checked down too often and he threw stupid INTs with regularity. He has done the same with the Jests and with the Panthers. I suspect that he doesn't see the field as well as he needs to in order to be a good NFL QB, so he not only doesn't see open receivers, he too frequently doesn't see defenders.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Not at the table Karlos said:
Much easier to make money in crypto than a casino. Play the peaks and valleys. As long as it goes up and down there's easy money to be made.
For the ordinary person, I'm guessing that's unlikely. Market timing in the stock market has never proven to be an effective long term strategy for individual investors, so I can't see the much more volatile crypto markets being better. There are people who make good livings as professional gamblers at casinos but the average joe who wanders in off the street loses a lot more often than he wins.
-
1
-
-
Crypto in the 2020s seems to be where the stock market was in the 1920s: an unregulated investing "Wild West" where fortunes can be made overnight -- and lost in hours. A wise investor might put a very small percentage of his/her funds into it but in its present unregulated state, crypto seems about on a par with gambling at a casino or race track. Maybe the crypto collapse will put the brakes on the recent push by some financial companies to push crypto "investments" for 401ks and Roth IRAs.
-
On 6/16/2022 at 5:34 PM, Mr. WEO said:
Mayfield threw for 3725 yards (#8 all time) and 27 TDs (#2 all time) in 13 starts his rookie season. Was PFWA Rookie of the Year.
2 years later, he brought the Browns to their 1st playoff game in 18 years. 11-5 with 26 TD on only 8 ints. Was injured last year.
Voted by his peers as NFL top 100 players in 2019 (50) and 2020 (71).
Took Josh 3 seasons t get over 3100 yards per. Both with 59/60 starts, 14k yards, JA with 10 more TD. Josh is obviously the better player, but Mayfield came off the bus ready to play. He is part of an organization run by idiots. Not sure Carolina will do much for him (Cleveland may have permanently damaged him)--just a different group of idiots down there.
I think that Mayfield simply hasn't grown professionally. He started out at a high level (for a rookie QB) but he really hasn't upped his game significantly since his second season. Is that on him or on the Browns? I don't know. What I do know is that it's not uncommon for highly drafted QBs to fail to improve significantly after their first or second year as a starter.
-
3 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:
So being 24th in the NFL in completion % is bad?
Because that's where Josh Allen ranked last year.
Are you saying Josh Allen was a bad QB last season?
Maybe the stats you are choosing are poor choices.
You are totally f*cking beat in this discussion and just looking dumber with each successive entry.........put in the reserves.
Is there some point to your continuing attempts to "prove" Rob Johnson wasn't a crappy QB? I mean, other than your need to argue contrarian positions that aren't supported by facts in order to demonstrated your superiority to everybody else.
-
1
-
-
IMO, Rob Johnson is more of a Trent Edwards "doppelganger" than a Josh Allen "doppelganger".
Johnson and Edwards suffered from the same issue: they couldn't read defenses well and couldn't process what they did see fast enough to be effective. That's why they were inconsistent, mostly playing poorly but sometimes looking like they were actually competent QBs when playing against crappy defenses or when defenses went into "prevent" mode or when, like the proverbial blind squirrel, they luckily found a nut. They were both sacked so often because they held the ball too long. No amount of physical talent can make up for the lack of a QB being able to recognize defenses quickly and accurately and make good decisions based on what they see.
-
2
-
-
19 minutes ago, aristocrat said:
I gotta admit the guy has confidence in this like I’ve never seen. Like, flip the switch and everything is fundamentally changed and no bad things happen. So easy. I’m just curious if there’s a backup plan?
True believers don't need backup plans.
-
1
-
-
I have catbirds coming to one of my suet feeders that I located close to my tall arborvitae screen. The starlings either don't like the location or they haven't found it since it's on a combo feeder and faces the trees. They do clean up the other suet feeders in short order.
-
On 6/14/2022 at 10:25 PM, Poleshifter said:
I have tried to warn a few people about the coming collapse of the stock market. But I am not a financial advisor or economist, just a retired software engineer, so nobody listens. Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Tether are doomed along with most other crypto. The only survivors will be those "coins" to be used in the quantum financial system, where ISO20022 certification is required.
There is a "***** hits the fan" event coming soon, perhaps this Thursday June 16 when Evergrande is removed from the stock market. When this happens, cryptos will take a quantum leap, in one direction or the other. Once things settle down, crypto trading should then be more of an incremental thing.
In your position, I would cash in a chunk of stock and buy XLM and XRP. Being risk averse, this is likely not an option.
Time will tell the rest of the story.
LOL. The doomsday prepper crowd has been warning "disbelievers" like me about "the manure hitting the fan" for the last couple of decades, most loudly back in the Great Recession. I've made a lot of money over that time by ignoring guys wearing tin-foil hats, so I see no reason to start listening to them just because the stock market has been down recently.
-
On 6/13/2022 at 1:15 PM, NewEra said:
That stance, imo, says that coaches are stagnant and they are what they are. That they cannot improve and make adjustments to better themselves.
If you truly believe that McD will be the same coach 5 years from now as he is today, you’re greatly mistaken. He’s improved immensely as a HC since 2017 imo. I fully expect a man with his passion and drive to succeed to continue to improve and evolve. The negative stain on your brain doesn’t allow you to see the obvious. While he made a huge mistake and lost that game in the final 13 seconds, he’s been adapting year after year and improving as a HC.
Just about any professional, whether in sports or another field, is better after several years into his/her career than at the start of it. Eventually, everyone peaks and then either stays at the same level or declines. In a field that's not dependent primarily on physical ability, there's not really a limit on how long somebody can continue to improve. Many athletes manage to make up for the declining physical abilities by continuing to improve the rest of their abilities. Peyton Manning and Drew Brees come to mind. Brady's in this group, too, although the decline in his physical abilities isn't particularly apparent yet.
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, Wacka said:
Haven't read the article yet, but from your recap, I think you got something incorrect. The antibodies in the therapy would not alter the cancer cells DNA. The antibodies trigger the patient's immune system to attack the cancer cells as foreign. The cancer's cells existing mutations could not allow the cancer to mutate further and escape detection by the immune system. How long have the patients been free of recurrences?
Seems promising, but having a background in DNA replication, I've seen many reports of a "cure" that didn't pan out.
Cancer treatment has come a long way but each cancer is basically a different type of disease.My godmother died from pancreatic cancer. She lasted 2.5 years after diagnosis. The doctor gave her an experimental drug that he said wouldn't cure her, but would prolong her life for a while. My dad died >30 years ago from small-cell lung carcinoma. There was no cure and survival was 5-10 % with surgery. It couldn't be operated on because of location and chemo slowed it down a few months. I am seeing ads on TVnow of Optivo and another drug that says they will prolong the life of people with this cancer.
I could have misunderstood the summary; I'm a long, long time away from college biology! As I understood the extract,the basis of this drug therapy was that the cancer had a mutation that made it hard/harder for the cancer cells' to repair altered/damaged DNA. The drug somehow facilitated damage to the cancer cells which resulted in the cancer being "cured".
I'm not sure that the extract gave the length of time that the patients have been cancer free, but I don't think that cancer survivors are ever considered "cured" the way someone would be cured of an infection. I think that the promise of this drug therapy is that it shows that the idea of attacking the DNA of cancer cells can be effective.
A friend of mine who is very well educated but is totally a non-scientific/non-technological person who generally views things through the prism of "how much it costs" was complaining recently about the billions that have been spent on cancer research without finding "a cure". I tried explaining to her that cancer isn't a single disease but a myriad of diseases with many variations even within the same type but I don't think she accepted that idea. She just saw billions of dollars going to fight "cancer" with apparently limited success rather than a very broad spectrum of success depending upon the specific type of cancer. I think that a lot of people who aren't particularly interested in science/medicine and/or have not been personally impacted by cancer (which is the case of my friend) simply don't understand that cancer isn't a single disease, so they get frustrated that it's not already "cured" despite all the resources devoted to it.
Do You BitCoin?
in Off the Wall
Posted
Skepticism is a good trait for any investor. You could use more of it since you seem to have bought into some significantly faulty information.