Display:
Surely, market shares do not have "dubious value". But mathematically, you may speak of a pyramid scheme (whether designed or emergent) whenever volume increase alone pushes share prices up..
But this has the effect of labeling every successful business a pyramid scheme, which they are not.  I've used Medtronic before as an example.  A young engineer invented a product that became the world's first pacemaker.  It was expensive at first, and a little clugey, but as engineers worked on it the quality of the product improved dramatically and the costs in real terms came down.  I believe Baxter was the first company to come out with dialysis machines--same experience.  St. Jude with heart valves.  New products that address unmet customer needs are going to grow in volume dramatically.  Sometimes they will be products that are lifesaving, other times they will be products that people just enjoy--maybe Starbuck's coffee.  So you are certainly right that one of the driver's of shareholder value in these cases is that people buy the product in greater quantities, this produces more sales and profits, and the price of the shares appropriately reflect that.  But this is more of a true demand cycle.  Pyramid schemes are based upon creating false, artificial demand, where the person at the end of the chain gets caught losing his money--inevitably.  With shares in public companies, if the management runs the company well, brings out new products, continues to meet customer needs better than the competition (which of course will emerge), then the shares will continue to do well.  If the company can't keep up, management will be fired, and if new management can't get it back on track, then the company may be bought, maybe even go out of business.  But this whole cycle is not described by the marketing model known as a pyramid scheme.
by wchurchill on Tue Mar 6th, 2007 at 11:53:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The key difference is between the words "volume increase alone pushes share prices up" and "one of the drivers of shareholder value". It depends how negligible or significant are other factors.

There is a gray area in between. Very successful buisinesses indeed risk to run into pyramid modes. Investors have to make good judgements themselves.

I do not suggest to draw subtle lines in the gray area. I even consider profitting from brief fluxes of speculative interest as healthy. (That is the way to curb speculative interest.) Regulation is hardly possible in the gray area.

But government (or public) may keep an eye on the bubles without reccuring interventions. First of all, playing in stock markets does not have to be made as easy as possible. When people are tempted to make unjustified decisions, it's getting closer to a deception. Participation in the markets must still be free, of course, but it should not become the main way of making living for the masses. Or to put it other way, not only financial talent should be encouraged. People should have good chances to achieve good living standards without necessarily diving into pecularities of stock and real estate markets.

Secondly, when a bubble become more apparent and holds for longer time, public awareness should be raised. What usually happens now, a speculative bubble is disguised by all means possible as long as possible - which is very "fair" to the speculants of the moment, but eventually becomes unfair for a unspecified large group of later buyers.

Only then comes a more interventive stage of bubble management. Here the interesting problem is: how eager buyers should be "convinced" to cool off, or accept limitations.

by das monde on Tue Mar 6th, 2007 at 08:29:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]
But das monde, you are mixing and confusing two different concepts, speculation and pyramid marketing.  Once again using wikipedia, speculation is
Speculation, in the narrow sense of financial speculation, involves the buying, holding, selling, and short-selling of stocks, bonds, commodities, currencies, collectibles, real estate, derivatives or any valuable financial instrument to profit from fluctuations in its price as opposed to buying it for use or for income via methods such as dividends or interest. Speculation or agiotage represents one of three market roles in western financial markets, distinct from hedging, long term investing and arbitrage. Speculators in an asset have no intention to have long term exposure to the asset.[1]
Pyramid marketing which I quoted above is something else.  Your argument regarding speculation and bubbles makes sense as an argument--I would argue the other side of the issue,, but still your argument is a good one.  but the comparison to pyramid marketing just doesn't make sense.
by wchurchill on Tue Mar 6th, 2007 at 10:06:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Speculation and pyramid schemes are not the same. But if profit margins of speculation come from new entrants alone, I call it an emergent pyramid scheme. The reason is pretty clear: if volume increase is the only fuel, the system would collapse when there are no new buyers. The biggest loosers are the last buyers. Regular traders might be loosers as well, which is worse than a designed pyramid scheme - or not, if scammers are punished. I see enough similarity between perils of both scenarios to refer to them by the same term.
by das monde on Tue Mar 6th, 2007 at 10:35:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]
well just understand that your writings on these topics will not make sense to people in business or economics, because you are giving accepted terminology new definitions.  and most of those people reading your work will just discard it, since it will appear you are not prepared to write on the topic.
by wchurchill on Tue Mar 6th, 2007 at 10:49:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I think I am very clear with presenting what I mean.

It is not exactly my purpose to enlighten all buisinessmen or economists. I don't care of those who would take more trouble in detecting language formalities than getting the point. What we are discussing is that certain things in market economy walk like a pyramid scheme, quark like a pyramid scheme, and most importantly, expand and collapse like a pyramid scheme.

by das monde on Tue Mar 6th, 2007 at 11:16:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't see what the problem is. If you think of the equity market as an entity, if newcomers put money into it in the hope of future returns, its value will appear to grow.

wchurchill - how exactly is this different to what's happening today?

Given that there's really very little of the technological innovation that you describe happening today - there's a lot of 'cheaper', but comparatively little 'new', I think the pyramid description is a perfectly apt and revealing one.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Wed Mar 7th, 2007 at 07:42:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]
There is an incredible amount of technological innovation happening today in the fields I follow closely.  I've given numerous examples before, and am not going to waste my time going through it again.  Some people can see the future and how it's going to be changed by innovation and technology, other can't.  The former group does better economically and psychologically by participating in changes that help mankind.

As to understanding the implications of pyramid marketing, versus speculation, versus "bubbles", there is plenty to read and gain insight.  It doesn't matter to me if you and das monde choose to confuse them.

by wchurchill on Wed Mar 7th, 2007 at 03:02:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
As a matter of academic terminology, a pyramid scheme (or pyramid scam) is defined by the rigid structure of participation. Matrix schemes work the same as sustainability regards, but they have other participation structure.

On the other hand, the Russian GKO bonds are often given as an example of a pyramid scheme, though they were traded within the stock market structure. If we call this case a "created pyramid structure" in the stock market, then it makes compatable to speak about "emergent pyramid schemes" in stock markets. That is what I am talking about.

For most consistency, the cases of Ponzi & pyramid scams, matrix schemes, and created/emergent pyramid schemes in stock markets should be grouped to one term. You may come up with a better English word combination, but here is a formal definition, as general as I can:

Entrant growth - a trading structure where profit margins of beneficiaries come predominantly from new entrants.

The special case of entrant growth in stock markets can be called... bubble growth!?! Unless there are objections from bubble specialists, we may offer a mechanism how the bubbles grow in economy, or even quantify them perhaps!  

by das monde on Wed Mar 7th, 2007 at 09:58:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series