30/05/2021 15:51:55
The stock market is thinking in depth (3): who says the market is “new”? That's the main force
There are rumours that have long been true. But if we think about it, we'll find it a mistake. It's called blackmail。
For example: new and old。
In order to increase the truth and authority of this sentence, it was expressed in the name of zhao. The text read as follows:
There are new subjects, and the old ones have been abandoned。
Only new subject matter would have the most sensitive and sharpest share of the market。
In fact, it was not zhao's own words, but someone named it. Of course, some say it's after zhao。
My view is that even if this sentence is what zhao himself said, even if it is what seo shang said, even what soros said and what buffett said, we can rethink it。
Not just top, not authority, but markets。
According to my years of observation of the market, i have found that “new and old” issues cannot be so arbitrary and one-size-fits-all。
Sometimes markets are new and old, but more often they do not function on the basis of the old and new of the subject, but on the basis of the size and level of the subject matter。
In other words, old and new is not even true。
When's the market new? Two scenarios:
One is that the subject matter is of similar grade and size, so it can only be classified according to old and new。
The other is the fact that the old, big-issue cycle is over and has a negative effect, and it is at this point that a new subject becomes apparent。
Why do many people think the subject is always good? It's a memory deviation, or it's impossible to recognize the size of the subject, and it's always new and old thinking。
For example, from spring festival to the present, what are the core topics?
It's two things, one in carbon and the other in medicine。
Both are, by definition, old subjects, but they remain the main players in the market today。
Don't you see
Ha sanctuary, suning globe, zhuang group, longjian shares have been telling the story of the medical beauty
Long-source power, fujian kingson, controlled development, and silver power have been on the carbon-neutral track
How much of the so-called "new subject" disappears into the dust of history, for example
Xinjiang cotton
China-iran cooperation
Family planning
Hainan island
Japanese nuclear radiation
I'm sorry.
Of course, they were “new” for two or three days, but their earning effect and the space at which they produced the head were far from as carbon neutral and medical as well。
If you're going to believe that there's something new, and you're going to throw it away, then you're going to miss a lot of medical and carbon-neutral tracks。
Not only this year, but also last year. In 2020, the oldest and longest topics on the market were white wine and epidemics, which lasted almost a year and never lost their charm because they were old. Even its hot spots and spans have reached this year and now. Such as tycoon technology, liquor industry, unnamed medicine, re-star medicine, etc。
One thing, you can't kill it because it's old. As long as it's big enough and its track is long enough, it can always grow fresh。
For example, the oldest topic on the market in the big cattle market in 2014-2015 has become the most enduring one, along the way and on the internet. Since 2014, this topic has been covered in china's south china railways, china iron and steel, china ocean ocean, china, china, and so on, and has since been extended to 2017. And the internet+ is the end of the whole cow town。
In fact, this phenomenon can be found in any round of cattle markets, such as the one in 2006 - 2007, where the whole market was surrounded by colour, real estate and banks, and where it was fired for more than two years。
Many of these cases are listed and are not repeated。
It's at least one thing to say: it's not old。
What are you afraid of
I'm afraid there's no grade, i'm afraid there's no fermentation. It is even less likely that the main line will not be able to accommodate the main fund depth。
As long as a subject can ferment into the main line and grow into the power of the track, it is no problem to be old or old。
In my view, the new and old subjects are not the key, but the fermentation of the subject matter. It is the subject and the main source of funding that is the answer。
Of course, i am not opposed to new subjects, and i deliberately do not like them. On the contrary, i actively embrace any new subject, and i read a lot of news and up-to-date information every day, actively looking for new things。
But i see new things not as a “new” angle, but as if the “new” can be matched by super-funds. If it can't match, what's new about it
Every day much new things go, new hotspots rise, but most of them become artillery ash. And few have grown into the sexual power of the track。
Some friends like to chase hot spots every day, read too much in new news and words, ambushed too much, and turned a new hot spot into a dud. And the hot spots on the main line continue to tell the story of the lead, play and dance。
This is because these friends misread the term “new” and put too much effort on “new” excavations, forgetting the terms “grade”, “mainline” and “race”。
It is even more forgotten that “new and old” are only shallow dimensions, and that the depth of the main funding is the depth of each other's depth。
In fact, the level of interest in old and new issues varies from level to level. Large-scale players, concerned with the continuity of the subject matter, small-scale players, concerned with the freshness of the subject matter. The subject continues to play big and deep. It's fresh, it's stimulating, but it's easy to get tired of it and stop. How can you let a big player shoot himself every day for a place
Deep, deep, that's what big players care about。
So, looking at markets in the future, it's not just who the new hotspots are, who the old hotspots are, but who the main market lines are and who the big players are。
If so
You'll see different markets
Be a different player
Some of the observations and conclusions in this paper may be different from those of some of the leading figures, as well as from those currently prevailing in the market, and may be criticized and refuted by many. Actually, this is the value of this paper. It's a different view to create sparks. If there are clouds, there is no value in this。
I hope my thinking will inspire you to think. I hope i'll give you something to think about。
