"Investors are..." - Aussie Stock Forums

Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1

    Default "Investors are..."

    Everytime I check the finance news, there is always some headline or first sentence that begins with "Investors are expected to lift the market higher after talks in Europe..." or "investors will be pulling the market down after US job data was..."

    But are they mis-using the term 'investor'? When I think of the word 'investor', I think about mom and pa and generally people who invest for the long term, people who think "I'll put my money in now, and hopefully it'll go up in 5 years". But they're not the people to think "omg, US job data is positive, I'm back in baby!" or "France's bond yield was too high, I'm out". I think of people who think carefully before acting, rather than acting on every tidbit of news.

    I think market movement is largely due to traders and big companies like superannuation funds. I do not consider them 'investors'. They are the ones reacting to daily news (noise).

    So would it be more accurate if headlines replaced 'investors' with 'traders' or 'large company investors'?

  2. #2

    Default Re: "Investors are..."

    I think it would be best if they used terminology like, "our analysis predict markets will respond by... / in such a way...".

    News are very deceiving in many ways.

  3. #3
    short- to medium-term trader pixel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Perth, WA

    Default Re: "Investors are..."

    Methinks you're applying too narrow a meaning to the word "investor". The distinctions you suggest are often controversial, rarely important, and hardly ever of anything but semantic interest to an academic.

    In everyday use, the term is used increasingly to describe any person - be they natural, corporate, or legally ficticious - who exchanges cash for an asset and expects the asset to increase in value. After some indeterminate time, they swap the asset back into cash
    Some "investments" stay longer in the asset phase, others not so long. It depends on the investor's expectation and how quickly an asset has done its job of increasing its value.
    I have stayed invested in some assets for years; others I have sold after a couple of minutes.
    Does one make me an investor? The other a trader? I'm still the same person and couldn't care less what label is pinned on what I do.

    Sure, it would be more truthful if those morning spruikers and editors were saying/ writing something like: "Our guess is as good as yours; we think the ASX 200 will gain about 1% today because an official from {Bundesbank/ Fed/ Goldman-Sachs...} said things weren't as bad as they looked yesterday. The {DAX/ FTSE/ Dow...} rose, which usually means our market will rise as well."

    Now THAT would be understandable: reporting who said what, and explaining the logic behind a simple conclusion. Which is precisely why no self-respecting editor would publish anything that way. Financial matters must be mysterious, and the talking heads/ writers make themselves look better if they're on first-name basis with those elusive and all-knowing VIP "Investors".
    Artificial Intelligence is no match for Innate Stupidity.

  4. #4

    Default Re: "Investors are..."

    Quote Originally Posted by pixel View Post
    Financial matters must be mysterious, and the talking heads/ writers make themselves look better if they're on first-name basis with those elusive and all-knowing VIP "Investors".

    The term "investors" has become just another catch-all "label" for the world's mass media to play with. The mass media love nothing better than catchy, one word (preferably one syllable) labels.

    It's just too hard for them to spell out in detail precisely who said what and why and on behalf of whom with regard to that other catch-all term "finance".

    Ahhh, don't you just love today's much simpler world, where everything has simple labels?


  5. #5
    Mod: Call me Dendrobranchiata prawn_86's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Los Angeles
    Blog Entries

    Default Re: "Investors are..."

    Yeh just seems like another thread seeking a definition of which everyone will have a different opinion.

    Dictionary definition of investor is:
    to put (money) to use, by purchase or expenditure, in something offering potential profitable returns, as interest, income, or appreciation in value.
    So that means anyone putting money in the market is by definition an investor.

  6. #6

    Default Re: "Investors are..."

    The only type of investor that is important to a company is the one that they need to put additional funds in during a capital raising. The investors that are already invested suddenly have no importance (not that they ever did).

Similar Threads

  1. Difference between "ex-dividend date" and "record date"?
    By jun1031 in forum Beginner's Lounge
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 6th-September-2010, 05:19 PM
  2. Obama: US economic conditions are "dire" and "deteriorating"
    By numbercruncher in forum General Investment and Economics
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10th-January-2009, 05:34 PM
  3. ComSec "at limit" & "at market " explanation
    By mattyl2003 in forum Brokers
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 8th-January-2007, 10:42 PM
  4. Who Are These People?! "Sophisticated Investors"
    By laurie in forum Beginner's Lounge
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 13th-November-2005, 06:45 AM


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Aussie Stock Forums