Comments by "Magic Beans" (@Magic_beans_) on "Patrick Boyle" channel.

  1. ⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠ @josejesuspalmerin8554 ​​⁠Top 4 or top 10 would have made sense in this context because there are generally-understood tiers of auditing firms. The top 4 are worldwide and have $30-70B in revenues. The next six are still multinational but not everywhere , and their total billings are more like $3-8B each; it’s a big drop off. After that it does get blurry because there’s not much difference between the 11th and 15th, but that just testifies to what our host said: if they felt a need to specify Top 12 it almost certainly means they didn’t make the cut for Top 10.
    1
  2. Exactly. If you have no edge, why bother? When the house has an edge, on average the longer you play the more you’ll lose.
    1
  3. 14:08 When a business advertises itself as “the Netflix of [unrelated industry]” I pretty much immediately lose interest.
    1
  4. I appreciate your concern Mr. Boyle, but there are people out there making hour-long videos about the mechanics of 35+ year old video games. If it’s quality, people will watch. Also, were there seriously no ad breaks for this whole thing? Or was that just me?
    1
  5. And that’s not even new. In the 90s you could watch this happen with every website that wanted to be a business: - Offer useful service for free - Build customer base - Introduce subscription tier with perks - Remove popular features from free tier - Reintroduce those features within the subscription tier - Repeat until free users have no reason to stick around - Be shocked when new users stop coming
    1
  6. “Retired” is something of a euphemism. HMW has said in his videos that if the channel went away he’d have to go back to a regular job. It sounds more like how an athlete retires from competition but continues working as a coach or a businessman.
    1
  7. Our host talks about this in his video about performance chasing: ARK Invest tries to invest in small companies with billions of dollars, but their own buys & sells drive the price of their investments.They only come out ahead if the company is a runaway success
    1
  8. ⁠​⁠ @sblijheid Short answer, yes, it’s a distribution problem more than a production problem. There are some asterisks to that though, like how much pollution and deforestation we’re willing to tolerate, whether we can get people eating in a more vegetarian direction (not entirely veggie, just more so), or how much effort we can put into reducing food waste. Tying this back to the video, there are also reports suggesting we can feed the world entirely using organic farming methods, but those depend on very ambitious and sometimes contradictory assumptions. For example reducing animal farming for food to near zero but also maintaining access to animal-made fertilizers.
    1
  9. Classic sales technique: don’t sell a product, sell a problem.
    1
  10. The slogan was awful too. “Just because they don’t tell you doesn’t mean they don’t hurt.”
    1
  11. 2:30 How dare you? But yes.
    1
  12. 26:13 There are also a few who see that it’s a bubble or a Ponzi but believe they’re smart enough to be one of the first people out the door. Not sure Bieber’s in that group though.
    1
  13. I’d like to think I’d be the second kind of winner. I like my work and I think without some sort of work or volunteering I’d lose my sense of purpose. But if I could work part-time to take care of my family, or seasonally and travel more, that’d be pretty sweet.
    1
  14. 7:27 - If someone describes their business as “The [Magnificent 7 company] of [unrelated industry]” that tells me they don’t have an original thought in their head.
    1
  15. YOLOs result in losses: “Rogue trading.” YOLOs result in gains: “Unique market insights.”
    1
  16. I wouldn’t say nothing. Yes, scams like this have long existed, and they could just as easily claim to have a secret strategy trading forex or penny stocks. Still, as mentioned at 16:00 crypto’s irreversability and pseudonymity help the scammers avoid being shut down or the money recovered. When Bernie Madoff’s scam fell apart, over 90% of the money people had put into the scheme was eventually returned. It took years and they missed out on any gains for the time their money was in limbo, but they got something.
    1
  17. No, for an even-odds bet with binary outcomes it’s (2 * p) - 1 where p is your odds of winning. In the case you propose you should bet (2 * .9) - 1 or 80%. You may lose a bunch at once, but you’d recover with 3-4 consecutive wins, which is more likely to happen than not. Another way you could figure it is the difference between your chance of winning and your chance of losing: p - (1 - p), which gets us back to 2p - 1. (And as our host said, for investments you should probably cap your exposure at no more than half that number because investments aren’t binary.)
    1
  18. I suspect it comes from a well-founded mistrust of institutions. Big banks and government have shown they’ll sell you out for a nickel, why not take a chance on the unregulated fintech pitched by an influencer with zero understanding of finance?
    1
  19. I suspect some of it is a well-founded mistrust of institutions. The big banks and government agencies have shown they’ll sell you out for a nickel, why not take a chance with the uninsured fly-by-night company promoted by someone whose financial expertise is backed entirely by personal anecdote?
    1
  20. What I’d say this illustrates is that generation aside, half the population are hanging by a thread. Although as the history of pensions illustrates, that’s probably better than the historic average.
    1
  21. Be careful with that. 15:05
    1
  22.  @yeetyeet7070 Maybe, but the news media also know and exploit our human tendency to catastrophize. People hear “de-dollarization” and USAers will imagine their money completely losing value overnight. That encourages panic, and panic gets views.
    1