stupandaus

4 anni fadiscuss

yes, there are many factors that can influence a valuation. and in different price ranges, different factors will have different weights. since the price is not $0 today and is relatively close to the potential transaction price, the % likelihood of a transaction has much more influence.

stupandaus

4 anni fadiscuss

this is incorrect. the price going up is a reflection of the market's believe about the % likelihood of a deal.

for example at market close of $45.08, the market is betting there is a $45.08/$54.20 = 83% chance that this transaction goes through.

there are certainly individual stockholders who are buying because they like his involvement, but that is tiny compared to people buying and selling a very near-term bet

stupandaus

5 anni fadiscuss

Not sure if you are misremembering the Phil Ivey edge sorting case [1] or if you are thinking of another story. Notable in this case that the casinos won in the end.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Ivey#Edge-sorting_litigat...

stupandaus

6 anni fadiscuss

The US' unemployment rate was much, much lower than many western European unemployment rates prior to coronavirus, so it doesn't make sense to compare the absolute number here - instead you should be comparing relative figures. The US' unemployment rate has tripled in the past 2 weeks based on this analysis.

stupandaus

6 anni fadiscuss

Building on my analysis from last week:

1. This week's 6.6M new jobless claims represents ~4% of the estimated ~160-165M US Workforce.

2. This is incremental to the 3.3M new jobless claims filed week ending 3/21, totaling ~10M total jobless claims in the past 2 weeks.

3. The US unemployment rate was ~3.5% as of EOM February [1], so cumulatively that means we've hit ~10% unemployment as of EOW 3/28 (~10M incremental jobless claims = ~6%). That number is likely low and continuing to increase, as new jobless claims do not account for gig workers and many state unemployment sites have been inundated by these claims resulting in site crashes and people unable to file claims. In addition, layoffs have almost certainly continued between 3/28 and today.

4. The consensus estimate for this week's jobless claims was ~3.76M jobless claims, and the 6.6M actual claims blow the consensus estimate out of the water. That said, some analysts such as Goldman Sachs had estimated ~5.5M joblesss claims. Goldman Sachs estimates that unemployment will peak at ~15%. [2]

[1] https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000

[2] https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/31/coronavirus-update-goldman-s...

stupandaus

6 anni fadiscuss

Building on my analysis from last week: 1. This week's 6.6M jobless claims represents ~4% of the estimated ~160-165M US Workforce.

2. This is incremental to the 3.3M jobless claims filed week ending 3/21, totaling ~10M total jobless claims in the past 2 weeks

3. The US unemployment rate was ~3.5% as of EOM February, so cumulatively that means we've hit ~10% unemployment as of EOW 3/28 and that number is likely low (not accounting for gig workers) and almost certainly worsening this week.

[1] https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000

stupandaus

6 anni fadiscuss

A few things to note:

1. These figures are only new claims as of 3/21, so the numbers will get worse.

2. This is ~2% of the estimated ~160-165M US Workforce.

3. This is nearly 5x (!) the prior record of 671K new jobless claims from 1982, and redefines the scale for jobless claims. [1]

4. This does not account for the countless gig workers that are part of the modern economy that likely did not file for unemployment since they were not covered prior to the passing of the senate bill last night.

This goes to show just how sharp of an impact the coronavirus pandemic has had relative to past recessions. Even the '08 Financial Crisis took MONTHS to unravel.

[1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/ICSA

comments