Down Jones intrinsic values??

[Hydrogen]

What’s down joke intrinsic value?

I guess its intrinsic value is it being propped up by the net dollar worth of silicon valley. Which translates to it reprsenting giants like apple, google and microsoft which began as small businesses operated out of a garage. To eventually becoming described as monopolies over massive multi billion dollar industries. That type of growth and sector entrenchment is something nations around the world have tried to replicate for decades without success. Non IT giants like tesla, walmart and amazon also exhibit extraordinary amount of growth, value and domination, from a business pov.

Reading DOW listings is like compiling a dream team for global business domination. I guess that's the closest thing it has to intrinsic value.

BUT there is also the united states excellent record for humanitarianism and trust. Protecting rights, copyrighted and patented intellectual property and freedoms to consider. Which make the USA an attractive place to start and grow a business over many other global options. That could also be considered an intrinsic value, other nations of the world could have trouble replicating.

[1714731553]

1714731553

[Broly46]

The intrinsic value of a share of the down jones underlying value or the current value of any future cash flow with no protection expected is the exact discounted discount rate. In order to get insights from comparative firms that differ with comparative assessment forms internal assessment simply assesses the underlying value of a particular business on its own most of the time novice investors get entangled in jargon words and get nothing out of them the same part goes for a distinct value.

===
Down jones is backed by jargon words??
===

This is the reason why big names in nasdaq do not care about crypto all that much and some of them think we will go down in the end. How could you put mining rigs of bitcoin creation as value for bitcoin itself, but all those TRILLIONS of dollars worth of companies as nothing? All those workers, all those products, all those buildings, even the simplest hand held stuff have a huge value without even putting all the work into it, but somehow some graphic cards are more value than them?

Yup the graphic cards can do more jobs than mere human worker counterparts.

If we keep this silly fight going instead of trying to get allied with wall street, we will be the ones who will lose, they constantly buy at cheap, they let you sell at low and basically work the media all the way they want just to kick you off from crypto, get friendship with them and maybe crypto small timers could survive.

[/quote]

===
Aawwww, war street want to have at it again.

===

but you just explained production cost not intrinsic value. and neither gold nor bitcoin are not products being sold so that we can put their production cost + tax + profit as the final value.
this definition specifically doesn't work for bitcoin because its production cost depends directly on its value not the other way around (thanks to the way difficulty is defined).

Yup, the basic of market place, you sell your bread at higher price than your cost of producing the bread, or running out of money by constantly selling at loss.

for example you can spend a lot of money to recycle urine into drinkable water (what NASA does for astronauts) but you can't sell the water at a high price just because your production cost were high.

[/quote]
They might try to sell water on the space where it’s scarcity.

value should only be defined by considering factors such as utility and scarcity. since we can't put numbers on it people end up using "production cost" which is wrong if you ask me.

But the production cost always come into mind when valuing something, everybody go to super mart and check the value by it’s cost.

it provides a good utility. it helps gamblers make bets and lost money while the elite get fatter from their money

===

Keeping hearing talk about the elite , are they very fatty from the down joke now??

===

"Blue chips" and "ever changing" don't exactly go together. Something tells me Apple, Microsoft, Mcdonald's, and Coca-Cola will still exist in 10 years.

10 years I'd say with almost certainty.  100 years, not so much.  OP has a point that these indexes are constantly changing, although not that often.

The "intrinsic value" of a stock (or a stock index) comes from the capital invested in the businesses that underlie the stock, and the earnings the companies generate.  I don't know if that counts as intrinsic value or not, but I do know that it's those things that give stocks whatever value they have.

But but, down joke generate earnings? But down jones never get boot off the index? Down jones will existed certainly in 1000 years while Lehman brother cease to existed.

I don't know if I agree with either of those statements.  Intrinsic value is what something is worth simply by existing, right?  If that's true, the statement about bitcoin is completely off, and so is the one about gold.  Gold's instrinsic value is that it can be used to make jewelry or coins--but only as long as human beings want those things.  Maybe my understanding of the term is lacking, but I'm thinking that it tends to get applied to bitcoin and other investments too much anyway.

[/quote]

===

Everything should have a value, I think intrinsic value is the “true” value of an item, many value is deceiving since it change all the time, so we need a standard to measuring the value of an item, bycalling it intrinsic value?

===

[bitgolden]

The thing people are not seeing nowadays with the "intrinsic values" is the fact that there are things you can't calculate with a data that brings a profit to a company on top of the cost of the product. Just to give an example, how much one iphone costs for Apple to make? Just one of them costs around 450 bucks or so to make one, but they sell it for like 999 dollar instead.

Everyone thinks that there is a supply and demand that makes something 2x more in price right? That is not all there is to it, there is a ton of money spend on marketing, on branding, on manhours, effort put into it all of that costs money to apple, they didn't become success overnight, you can build a phone for 450 dollars or more today, make much much better phone and still fail to sell for 999 dollars, those are costs put into the company and not the product but they are still costs.

[ChiBitCTy]

Gold intrinsic values is gold mining from earth crust the man-power and their valuable life, the logistics of gold delivery.

Bitcoin intrinsic value is the mining rigs, the difficulty curve, the supply, the miner valuable life, the risk of delivery bitcoin to buyer without getting hacked.

What’s down joke intrinsic value? I think it’s backed by ever changing bluechips that won’t existed in the next tens or so years?

I'm not sure you really understand how the stock market works.  The Dow Jones is filled with 30 of the largest United States stocks.  Names such as Nike, Microsoft, 3M, Honeywell, Intel, Coca-Cola, McDonald's, The Home Depot, Walmart, Disney etc are what makes up the Dow.  These companies have been around for decades and will continue to be.  If you think they'll be gone in 10 years, I'd love to hear how/why?  The Dow, filled with 30 stocks, derives it's value from the companies that sell products, products that you and I likely use ever single day.  You are completely misguided.

Here's a proper explanation of intrinsic value btw- https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/intrinsicvalue.asp

[wxa7115]

Gold intrinsic values is gold mining from earth crust the man-power and their valuable life, the logistics of gold delivery.

Bitcoin intrinsic value is the mining rigs, the difficulty curve, the supply, the miner valuable life, the risk of delivery bitcoin to buyer without getting hacked.

What’s down joke intrinsic value? I think it’s backed by ever changing bluechips that won’t existed in the next tens or so years?

Well, technically speaking the stock is backed by the particular company that put that stock in the market, and the stock market in general is backed by all the companies that are part of the stock market, however it is a well known fact that for the most part the stock market is overvalued most of the time, but since it is very easy to trade paper assets the rich prefer to use this form of investing, think of this as all of those that collect baseball cards and similar items.

However the market goes back to its intrinsic value when the economy crashes and only the real assets of the company are taken into account to determine their value, which means that once the economic equivalent of the Great Depression comes to happen I will not be surprised to see stocks crashing 90% at least.

[Hydrogen]

I'm not sure you really understand how the stock market works.  The Dow Jones is filled with 30 of the largest United States stocks.  Names such as Nike, Microsoft, 3M, Honeywell, Intel, Coca-Cola, McDonald's, The Home Depot, Walmart, Disney etc are what makes up the Dow.  These companies have been around for decades and will continue to be.  If you think they'll be gone in 10 years, I'd love to hear how/why?  

Some americans are obsessed with punishing US big tech and retailers like amazon with unions, taxes and regulation. They believe billionaires like Jeff Bezos are evil and must be punished. This in theory will lead to a better and brighter future. Europe and asia on the opposite end of the spectrum, are often obsessed with giving their corporations and private sector as many advantages as possible. They want to grow their corporations into monopolies, rather than punish them for achieving this. The disparity in economic policy could outline a future where united states markets decline, with european and asian markets rising to fill their place.

The united states is (I think) the only nation in the world that severely punishes and breaks up corporations for having monopolies under anti trust laws.

There is a real possibility americans could soon succeed in destroying their own corporate giants.  

[exstasie]

Some americans are obsessed with punishing US big tech and retailers like amazon with unions, taxes and regulation. They believe billionaires like Jeff Bezos are evil and must be punished.

That's one take. Another take is that people are annoyed that companies like Amazon pay no federal income tax, while income taxes take a sizeable bite out of their own paychecks. Unions are not "punishment" either. They are the embodiment of basic 1st amendment rights of association, speech, etc. Giant corporations are not perpetual victims, and workers have a right to bargain collectively to secure fair wages and working conditions.

[Hydrogen]

Some americans are obsessed with punishing US big tech and retailers like amazon with unions, taxes and regulation. They believe billionaires like Jeff Bezos are evil and must be punished.

That's one take. Another take is that people are annoyed that companies like Amazon pay no federal income tax, while income taxes take a sizeable bite out of their own paychecks. Unions are not "punishment" either. They are the embodiment of basic 1st amendment rights of association, speech, etc. Giant corporations are not perpetual victims, and workers have a right to bargain collectively to secure fair wages and working conditions.

....

US companies pay the highest corporate taxes in the world. Some are unhappy with this arrangement and support significantly increasing taxes. This places US business in global markets at a disadvantage, when contrasted with foreign corporate tax rates.

Unions in the USA are neither objective nor bipartisan. They're extremely polarized an biased in favor of a single political demographic. Which leads to them being a method of control and perhaps, pushing agendas. One example of this is new york where amazon planned to create 25,000 high paying jobs prior to Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and others scaring amazon out of the state with plans to regulate amazon's worker base through unions.

Both precedents carry a potential to handicap US business in comparison to advantages foreign business enjoys. Microsoft could be a huge corporation with a monpoly over the OS sector. But if they pay 40% corporate taxes while chinese corporations pay 0% taxes. That disparity could end any advantages US corporations hold over the long term.

[exstasie]

That's one take. Another take is that people are annoyed that companies like Amazon pay no federal income tax, while income taxes take a sizeable bite out of their own paychecks. Unions are not "punishment" either. They are the embodiment of basic 1st amendment rights of association, speech, etc. Giant corporations are not perpetual victims, and workers have a right to bargain collectively to secure fair wages and working conditions.

US companies pay the highest corporate taxes in the world.

That is before you account for tax subsidies, credits, and deductions. Amazon paid zero federal income tax for 2017 and 2018. In fact, they received tax refunds. For last year, they paid an effective tax rate of 1.2%.

That image is also old. The Trump tax cuts lowered the corporate tax rate to 21%.

Unions in the USA are neither objective nor bipartisan. They're extremely polarized an biased in favor of a single political demographic. Which leads to them being a method of control and perhaps, pushing agendas.

I hate labor unions in their current form. Nevertheless, unionization is a basic civil right, and I don't see it as a way of "punishing" companies at all. Labor rights are at their weakest point in many decades. If that trend reverses, it's not a punishment, just a cultural trend that companies need to adapt to. If it cuts into their profits, so be it.

In contrast, the recent corporate tax cuts were a gift to their profits. I don't see why in a so-called democracy, corporations should enjoy an endless trajectory of favorable tax treatment and deregulation. Sometimes society moves in the other direction.

Amazon and similar companies have teams of lobbyists that will ensure favorable loopholes in any future legislation anyway.

[tbterryboy]

Everyone thinks that there is a supply and demand that makes something 2x more in price right? That is not all there is to it, there is a ton of money spend on marketing, on branding, on manhours, effort put into it all of that costs money to apple, they didn't become success overnight, you can build a phone for 450 dollars or more today, make much much better phone and still fail to sell for 999 dollars, those are costs put into the company and not the product but they are still costs.

Yep, many people are fond of neglecting the fact that companies has to invest more money in marketing and advertising. A company can create good products but without adverts it will be heading nowhere, it will just get stuck in their hands. So, that’s why companies never stop advertising and promoting their products and a lot of money goes into that, even the biggest companies ,companies that you think have gotten to the highest top still runs advertisement because of how important it is.

So, all these things goes into calculation in determining the price of the product. That it cost them $450 doesn’t mean they would sell for $600 or so, they will sell higher to cover their cost in other ways.

[voron7477]

Dow Jones intrinsic value may be considered as the company's ability to generate cash.

[FanEagle]

Some americans are obsessed with punishing US big tech and retailers like amazon with unions, taxes and regulation. They believe billionaires like Jeff Bezos are evil and must be punished. This in theory will lead to a better and brighter future. Europe and asia on the opposite end of the spectrum, are often obsessed with giving their corporations and private sector as many advantages as possible. They want to grow their corporations into monopolies, rather than punish them for achieving this. The disparity in economic policy could outline a future where united states markets decline, with european and asian markets rising to fill their place.

The united states is (I think) the only nation in the world that severely punishes and breaks up corporations for having monopolies under anti trust laws.

There is a real possibility americans could soon succeed in destroying their own corporate giants.  

I have never seen a post that is as wrong as this one and it comes from you, someone I dearly admire and look up to, so it shocks me to see it. Regulations and taxes are not there to prevent these companies from becoming huge, it is there because if Amazon workers needs food stamps to survive, that means they are not paid well enough, whereas amazon pays zero federal taxes yet all the roads that lead to their warehouses were made by it.

The idea of regulations and taxing properly is not there to punish, these are things that should be for everyone's best interest, amazon is not evil at all, it is just bad business for anyone to collect all that money from everyone and give it to one person, it shouldn't be like that at all. Europe also has one of the highest rates of taxes so I have no idea why you would consider them a bad example, they are great with how amazing their tax system works.