[zdo]

This thread is drifting in and out of discussion about utility and fungibility. Foods, lego configurations, basketballs, hopes and dreams, ES, futures, oil, art, etc.
Serious, ie not rhetorical, question – is that part of the issue here of intermittent anomalies in what prices ‘typically’ / ‘should’ / ‘normally would’ do in a given supply and demand context?

[MC]

Originally Posted by zdo »

This thread is drifting in and out of discussion about utility and fungibility. Foods, lego configurations, basketballs, hopes and dreams, ES, futures, oil, art, etc.
Serious, ie not rhetorical, question – is that part of the issue here of intermittent anomalies in what prices ‘typically’ / ‘should’ / ‘normally would’ do in a given supply and demand context?

These deep thinking threads always make me LOL. Not that they are bad, these really get us all using our minds which is great. It's just funny to hear all the opinions fly around and sometimes the debates that ensue.

I probably would not have done that post about 2 chains of S&D without this fire under me. That 2 chain theory is one I've had for awhile now and just decided to test the waters here.

As for the basketball example, I have a twist that works for my view of the market...
You start with a basketball from Walmart bought at the reasonable retail price of $10. At some point the owner signs the ball Michael Jordan and claims to be selling a MJ signed ball. The bidding goes up because what was worth nothing and was common, is now all the sudden deemed a rare piece of memorabilia triggering peoples emotions and greed. As the bid goes higher so does the interest in this item, it must be worth even more otherwise why would people be so interested right? The advertised price is now extreme and the original seller, knowing it was a fake, prances away with $990 in profit. Now the new owner only bought it based on his greed, so he turns around to try and sell it for $2000. Only now there is no COA (certificate of authenticity) and people are questioning the validity of the signature. Now his offers are now in the $500 range, because there's still a slight chance it's legit and greed tells bidders they could still resell for profit. Fast forward...it's been exposed a phony signature. The bid collapses and now is back to being worth $10. The owner tucks it away for a few years till he has a garage sale. There someone buys it for $20 despite being told it's a fake. The seller is just happy to get some money back, and the shady buyer knows the signature is passable. The new owner opens an auction with new naive customers who know nothing of the prior auction. What do ya know, he sells the ball for $1000 again, and the cycle repeats over and over.

Of course there's allot more in the markets movement than a clear cut point A to point B. This is a simplistic look at things to say the least. One thing to take from this may be that what transpires in the middle is essentially noise and greed driven. The greed portion can linger on for quite some time as long as the hope of selling for profit is around. Now on the other hand, the extremes of the range often have quick reactions thanks to fear being the stronger of the emotions.
Another reason I feel this is a fair depiction of the market is the fact that the ball holder creates the bag holder. This market is not a fair game, there is deception at work. The "smart money" in the market preys on "dumb monies" greed and fear. "Not fair" some would say, well no, but what in life is fair?

[firewalker]

Originally Posted by zdo »

This thread is drifting in and out of discussion about utility and fungibility. Foods, lego configurations, basketballs, hopes and dreams, ES, futures, oil, art, etc.
Serious, ie not rhetorical, question – is that part of the issue here of intermittent anomalies in what prices ‘typically’ / ‘should’ / ‘normally would’ do in a given supply and demand context?

I think there has been a lot of valuable and original input. Getting slightly off topic is not uncommon, but in this case I think the thread so far has been quite interesting.

All comments were, and still are appreciated...

[SunTrader]

I don't see the basketball 'market' on EBay or elsewhere on the net as comparable to trading on the CME. Whether or not today, the eMini should be 1275 or 275 or 2575 is open to debate that S&D dynamics will determine.

But whether or not memorabilia, if the legitimacy is known, should be higher or lower is based only on people willing to collect them. Ex. the basketball can't be played with or it loses value. Also I doubt it is possible to 'short' collectibles.

Apples and oranges.

[MC]

Originally Posted by SunTrader »

I don't see the basketball 'market' on EBay or elsewhere on the net as comparable to trading on the CME. Whether or not today, the eMini should be 1275 or 275 or 2575 is open to debate that S&D dynamics will determine.

But whether or not memorabilia, if the legitimacy is known, should be higher or lower is based only on people willing to collect them. Ex. the basketball can't be played with or it loses value. Also I doubt it is possible to 'short' collectibles.

Apples and oranges.

True, sometimes you have to relate to other things to help people get an image of psychology though. It's about PERCEIVED VALUE and emotions, that was the intended point in my post anyhow, not the type of item.

Maybe you could go long Larry Bird collectibles at premiums and that might spook off Jordan buyers, in effect acting as short pressure? LOL J/K