"where i do disagree with you , is in the assertion that investors are quite so emotional beings.casual investors, perhaps. consumers, certainly. but the people who have, and have abundantly, are seldom quite so gullible.not for long anyway, or else they wouldn't have quite as abundantly."
I don't believe in emotion. If you knew me before, perhaps you would say that was a different me then. But I'd say it again. I don't believe in emotion. I would however, invest in it.
I'd take that argument a step further - casual investors may perhaps invest in emotion, in ethos, in marketing. After all, what makes us buy anything at all? Stocks and shoes may not be that different after all - otherwise Nike would not fare as well as it does.
Investors invest in what sells, in what makes profit. If marketing, hype and emotion sells... like hell they would buy it. As such, I sincerely doubt if the people who have, and have abundantly, may not have this consideration in mind as well.
At the end of the day, we may be looking at different things, but you can be sure that we're at least staring in the same direction.
3 comments:
she said
"If marketing, hype and emotion sells... like hell they would buy it."
he says
"we are staring in the same direction. in this illustration, investors would 'buy' the hype, but as a considered decision, not an emotional one.
however, i've recently come to doubt my own hypothesis. working to 'hype' my clients, i found myself considering, quite casually, investing in the company (or even companies) i 'work' for.
investigating further, i realised the thought emerged, not from a considered examination of their finances, guidance or the market for its product/service.
nor was it some subconscious valuation of the impact of my work on their brand.
instead, quite the opposite, i found the brand was leaving its imprint on me. that i even toyed with the idea, was the result, entirely, of an emotional bias.
then again, not having abundantly, i suppose i'm entitled to my share of gullible moments."
on a seperate note,
(and here, i would prefer you simply read and discard my comment instead of posting)
i don't know if i knew you before. i like to think i did, but we were but children playing at being grown up.
(i still have trouble seeing myself as "grown up" even today)
it would be easy to take you at your word. you do not believe in emotion. maybe you never did. between us, a dozen incidents could be isolated from their contexts and presented as evidence in support of this claim.
to not believe in emotion is a sweeping statement, that would require a deeper examination of the definition of each word. what is emotion? what is belief?
but if you present this as the truth, your truth, then i offer this feeble defence.
you wrote before. and you do now, keeping this weblog. you write, and not coldly either.
we say words have their own power. that is a lie. words only have power if the author imbues her words with power.
you are, perhaps, less of a humanist today, but no less human.
and your words still hold power, even if they are words spoken and written a lifetime ago, because when your lips formed them, when the tip of your pen touched the paper napkin, you invested emotion into them, to call them into existence.
you still do. i do not think it that easy, to shrug off our histories. if it were, faith would come so much easier.
Unfortunately my blog auto-posts comments, although you had formed these words, and took the time to form them into existence with your hands, let them not be lost words.
"I went all the way to Paris to forget your face...." If it were that easy to wipe out histories in a matter of days, months, years, they would not persist in time to repeat themselves, and I would not be writing this blog at all.
"So we must love while these moments are still called today
Take part in the pain of this passion play
Stretching our youth as we must, until we are ashes to dust
Until time makes history of us..."
Post a Comment