Timeline for How do I interpret this analysis from Second Opinion?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 3, 2011 at 7:40 | comment | added | Chuck van der Linden | Selling might also have tax implications, which reduce if held till gains become long term instead of short term, which might be another reason to hold. (especially if the price was lower relatively recently and they advised to establish new positions at that time.) People often fail to take taxes into account, and that can have an effect where the net gain is better in the long run to stick with something you own that only goes up x, rather than move to something that goes up x plus a little more but you are earning on a reduced balance (after taxes and comissions). | |
| Aug 3, 2011 at 1:25 | comment | added | MrChrister | @Chris W. Rea - don't sell due to the cost of selling, which would be a loss? Just guessing. | |
| Aug 2, 2011 at 23:58 | answer | added | duffbeer703 | timeline score: 3 | |
| Aug 2, 2011 at 17:44 | history | edited | Alex B | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited title
|
| Aug 2, 2011 at 15:05 | comment | added | Chris W. Rea | Personally, I find this kind of advice oxymoronic: 1. If it's worth holding, shouldn't it be worth buying? 2. If I shouldn't be buying it, then why should I bother holding it? | |
| Aug 2, 2011 at 5:29 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackFinance/status/98264150119170048 | ||
| Aug 2, 2011 at 4:50 | answer | added | Mike Scott | timeline score: 2 | |
| Aug 2, 2011 at 4:50 | answer | added | mgkrebbs | timeline score: 4 | |
| Aug 2, 2011 at 2:55 | history | asked | Marsellus Wallace | CC BY-SA 3.0 |