Comments by "ChineseKiwi" (@ChineseKiwi) on "The Plain Bagel" channel.

  1. 4:50 - *a wild Youtube monetisation thought appears*
    46
  2. 12:22 - the Canadian and Australian dollars - RESOURCE MINING COMPANIES GO BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
    31
  3. This factor out the factor of founders rigging the voting rights šŸ˜‚
    8
  4. Meanwhile me: Investing in a truck parts company with a near monopoly, an offshore vessel company in which the industry has a shortage of until at least 2027, and the only speculative one being a niobium (see rare earth metal) company who sits on top of a massive Tier 1 deposit and is needed for renewables and has massive shortages. Up 25% in 2-3 months and hodling the hell out of the offshore vessel company that itā€™s pending a takeover (that is far too cheap thus likely to be voted down in shareholder voting in June, which I will too as the shares are actually in my name). And Iā€™m interested in opening a position in an electricity infrastructure construction and maintenance company that looks way too cheap share price wise and will only get better due to greater electricity demand in years to come. But I always give it a few days to see share volume etc Good investing with good core fundimentals is boring investing. Alot of those with low P/E ratios, particularly ā€˜defensiveā€™ stocks = DEEP FCKING VALUE Oh yeah, Tradingview, even the free version, is over 9000 based too.
    6
  5. It isnā€™t even that complicated šŸ˜‚
    6
  6. Disneyā€™s crash and burn is due to them pushing the loss making Disney+ too hard, too fast. Occamā€™s Razor eh.
    4
  7. Like people actually bother to vote in them šŸ˜‚
    4
  8. Ā @victoneterĀ ironically you have this same dumb stuff from some in Australia, in which every worker has mandatory ā€˜401kā€™ on top of wages, that are managed by financial companies, who invest their money on their behalfā€¦.like exactly what Vanguard and Blackrock do šŸ˜…šŸ˜‚
    4
  9. What he is saying isnā€™t wrong if you know any sort of financial knowledge
    4
  10. Correct. Libertarians making new personal bests in speedrunning the history of financial regulations and corporate governance šŸ˜‚
    3
  11. Why not State Street shill or Fidelity Investments shill? Also why not Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund shill as they are the largest single shareholder? Oh they didnā€™t tell you to get mad at them. Got it. Not his fault you are financially illiterate
    3
  12. Sovereign Wealth Funds and SOEs say ā€˜uhā€¦ā€¦..ā€™
    3
  13. The Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund who own 1% of all global stocks does the same thing but the grifters and those who know nothing about finance didnā€™t tell you to hate themā€¦.
    3
  14. Yep, the grifter economy
    3
  15. Patrick is literally a hustle culture hustle-bro. Inception.
    3
  16. Ā @SD-mi2vcĀ ā€™helps my causeā€™ - of a lack of knowing how financial markets work.
    2
  17. Mate, all they do is literally manage other peopleā€™s money.
    2
  18. So you mean the many companies they ownā€¦.5% of. And that is assuming 1:1 voting rights, which for a lot of companies, it isnā€™t as often the founders deliberately stack the voting rights towards themselves despite owning less of the company.
    2
  19. They arenā€™t charities. They charge a fee for their service. I see you have never bought an ETF ever.
    2
  20. Ya probably the same guy that whines when your cheap stuff from Walmart gets more expensive.
    2
  21. You as the customer with the funds hold them responsible for returns - you can withdraw your money at any time via selling the ETF shares you own.
    2
  22. Hereā€™s a clue big guy: The US isnā€™t the only country in the world. ESG corporate governance is everywhere
    2
  23. Ā @ChippiesBRĀ  if you read the comments, you know why there is the confusion šŸ˜‚
    2
  24. If you bother to look into the percentages of which they own companies, it is often 5% or less. Not to mention this assumes 1:1 voting rights, which often isnā€™t the case as often the founders of the company deliberately stack the voting rights towards themselves far over the percentage of which they own the company. Not his fault you are financially illiterate.
    2
  25. Other countries have already have these instant payments systems for years Olā€™ Tinfoil. The US banking system is 10 years behind everyone else
    2
  26. Less cognitive dissonance bro.
    2
  27. Ā @SD-mi2vcĀ as stated why not Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund shill? They literally own 1% of ALL global shares.
    2
  28. Wall Street Millennial's video goes into the financials far more in depth as well.
    2
  29. Ā @PezzerdĀ because THEY OWN THE SHARES. Do you know how ETFs work? It is like you selling off a stock for whatever reason. When you are buying into an ETFs, you are paying them (via the management fee) to invest it ON BEHALF of you.
    2
  30. Just checked. Payment for order flow (PFOF) is banned under Australian law too since Feb 2014 :D
    2
  31. Ā @silentwitness536Ā  eh no. Watch it again. He was pointing out the bad reporting
    2
  32. If you bother to look into the percentages of which they own companies, it is often 5% or less. Not to mention this assumes 1:1 voting rights, which often isnā€™t the case as often the founders of the company deliberately stack the voting rights towards themselves far over the percentage of which they own the company. Not his fault you are financially illiterate. Your favourite Fox News, owned by the Murdoch family, have 39.4% of the voting power despite owning only 14% of the shares šŸ¤«šŸ¤£ Zucc has 60% of the voting rights in Meta despite owning far far less shares, because he owns 90% of the non public Class B shares, which have 10x the voting power of the public shares šŸ¤«šŸ˜‚ They donā€™t control shit eh.
    1
  33. Or it is if you have any sort of financial knowledge. Financial knowledge isnā€™t only the ones you choose to believe in.
    1
  34. Own all the shares in the holdings and micromanage them yourself thenā€¦Oh donā€™t want to? Then donā€™t complain.
    1
  35. If you bother to look into the percentages of which they own companies, it is often 5% or less. Not to mention this assumes 1:1 voting rights, which often isnā€™t the case as often the founders of the company deliberately stack the voting rights towards themselves far over the percentage of which they own the company. Not his fault you are financially illiterate. your favourite Fox News, owned by the Murdoch family, have 39.4% of the voting power despite owning only 14% of the shares šŸ¤«šŸ¤£ Zucc has 60% of the voting rights in Meta despite owning far far less shares, because he owns 90% of the non public Class B shares, which have 10x the voting power of the public shares šŸ¤«šŸ˜‚ They donā€™t control shit eh.
    1
  36. Also look up those released Fox News emails they were forced to release as part of the Dominion Voting Booth court case. They donā€™t actually believe what they say, they only want your viewership and thus ad revenue. Itā€™s right there in the emails. They, like all the other right wing people, are using you. Avatar was PLENTY woke but they didnā€™t tell you to get angry at it like an actual sheep because you didnā€™t care about ā€˜wokeā€™ until the mid 2010s (Avatar was 2009)
    1
  37. If you bother to look into the percentages of which they own companies, it is often 5% or less. Not to mention this assumes 1:1 voting rights, which often isnā€™t the case as often the founders of the company deliberately stack the voting rights towards themselves far over the percentage of which they own the company. Not his fault you are financially illiterate. your favourite Fox News, owned by the Murdoch family, have 39.4% of the voting power despite owning only 14% of the shares šŸ¤«šŸ¤£ Zucc has 60% of the voting rights in Meta despite owning far far less shares, because he owns 90% of the non public Class B shares, which have 10x the voting power of the public shares šŸ¤«šŸ˜‚ They donā€™t control shit eh.
    1
  38. Ā @nameTBAĀ is it wrong though? It isnā€™t factually. They canā€™t control shit because of those realities.
    1
  39. ā  Other countries have already have these instant payments systems for years Olā€™ Tinfoil. The US banking system is 10 years behind everyone else. Spot the American who knows nothing outside ya own borders (you).
    1
  40. Ā @DeAdBiGeYeFiShĀ  If you bother to look into the percentages of which they own companies, it is often 5% or less. Not to mention this assumes 1:1 voting rights, which often isnā€™t the case as often the founders of the company deliberately stack the voting rights towards themselves far over the percentage of which they own the company. Not his fault you are financially illiterate.
    1
  41. Ā @DeAdBiGeYeFiShĀ  do you think founders wouldnā€™t protect their own interests? šŸ¤« Occamā€™s Razor eh
    1
  42. There is - like that fact that if you bothered to look up the shareholder holdings of companies- Vanguard and Blackrock often often only own sub 10% of it. šŸ¤£
    1
  43. Ā @piccalillipit9211Ā ā€‹ā€‹ā only how are things changed in companies by shareholders? By voting. What if say the founders knowing this threat, rig the voting structure? Oh wait, they already do that! your favourite Fox News, owned by the Murdoch family, have 39.4% of the voting power despite owning only 14% of the shares šŸ¤«šŸ¤£ Zucc has 60% of the voting rights in Meta despite owning far far less shares, because he owns 90% of the non public Class B shares, which have 10x the voting power of the public shares šŸ¤«šŸ˜‚ Blackrock and Vanguard donā€™t control shit eh. Want a master class on rigging shareholder voting? See the Lee family, the founders of Samsung. Absolute art. Look it up.
    1
  44. Exactly. But tinfoil is cheap these days, and Occamā€™s Razor is out of stock.
    1
  45. Why not State Street shill or Fidelity Investments shill? Also why not Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund shill as they are the largest single shareholder? Oh they didnā€™t tell you to get mad at them. Got it. Not his fault you are financially illiterate
    1
  46. Friendly reminder: Banks can already do this if they suspect you of money laundering or you are not who you say you are via KYC / AML laws.
    1
  47. If you bother to look into the percentages of which they own companies, it is often 5% or less. Not to mention this assumes 1:1 voting rights, which often isnā€™t the case as often the founders of the company deliberately stack the voting rights towards themselves far over the percentage of which they own the company. Larry canā€™t do shit by himself bro.
    1
  48. 1:58 - Yep, other countries have had this for years at this point but US banking is always 10-15 years behind
    1
  49. They grifters didnā€™t tell the tinfoilers to hate them šŸ˜‚
    1
  50. If you bother to look into the percentages of which they own companies, it is often 5% or less. Not to mention this assumes 1:1 voting rights, which often isnā€™t the case as often the founders of the company deliberately stack the voting rights towards themselves far over the percentage of which they own the company. Not his fault you are financially illiterate. your favourite Fox News, owned by the Murdoch family, have 39.4% of the voting power despite owning only 14% of the shares šŸ¤«šŸ¤£ Zucc has 60% of the voting rights in Meta despite owning far far less shares, because he owns 90% of the non public Class B shares, which have 10x the voting power of the public shares šŸ¤«šŸ˜‚ They donā€™t control shit eh.
    1