HOLLYWOOD STOCK EXCHANGE
THE ENTERTAINMENT MARKET
THE ENTERTAINMENT MARKET
You have been here longer than me so you should know the answer....
The current format was introduced to replace the "index" funds which were poorly maintained and were of no value.
THe object of these funds is to see the relative strength of the movies produced by the studios (through the filter of the ability of the manager.) StarBonds do not reflect the strength or weakness of the products of the individual studio.
STUDIOXX will do well, generally, if it issues movies that do well. Another studio may issue disappointment after disappointment and the fund will gernerally reflect that. (Of course the wise manager knows when to short)
On the other hand, BONDS has it the other way. No MovieStocks, no weekend openers, no Nominoptions, no BW's
Question, just because I'm curious at the moment. What's the rationale given for why studio funds don't allow starbonds? {nm} Dec 29, 20:48
Do studios "own" the stars? {nm} Dec 29, 22:02
No, but you could argue that while working on the films, they are contracted employees of the studios. {nm} Dec 30, 05:39
You have been here longer than me so you should know the answer.... Dec 30, 05:50
So does that mean I shouldn't hold actor/actress/director NominOptions for movies that WB released? {nm} Dec 30, 08:54
No that's ok to do, DMac's initial email to me explicitly says related derivatives are allowed to be traded. {nm} Dec 30, 09:38
Wait, what? No, wait... No Lionsgate related nominoptions...Oh, ok... Nevermind... :) {nm} Dec 30, 14:15
Man, you got a short straw buddy, I do not envy you. :-) {nm} Dec 30, 18:47
It's ok, I'm making the best of it... Already reaching what the previous manager did, anything else is profit... :) {nm} Dec 31, 06:04
Same here, although the previous owner of my fund ended at $7.81, so I didn't have to do much to best it! {nm} Dec 31, 09:22
Well, there is Nick Nolte/Warrior {nm} Dec 30, 23:05
I hadn't noticed that! Thanks! :) {nm} Dec 31, 06:03
