Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
how does technology effect our culture today
how technology influences culture
how does technology effect our culture today
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: how does technology effect our culture today
Shiller attributes the creation of the dot-com bubble to structural, cultural and psychological factors. Structural factors include investor expectations and the feedback theory of bubbles. According to Shiller, most individual investors do not make their decisions based on careful calculations. Quantitative evidence discovered by experts has little meaning to them. During the 1990’s investors perceived the stock market as “the only game in town” (Shiller, 2015). Moreover, the stock market was a success story for so many investors since the late 1980’s. This created high expectations for the markets future performance. Investors did not want to regret a chance they did not take. Consequently, the market was crowded with investors who randomly …show more content…
In order to attract larger audiences, the financial news media shifted its focus from objective reporting to a more spectacular coverage. Experts were interviewed when they had news that stimulate the confidence of investors. The most prominent subject of discussion was the expected advent of a new era economy. This term is nowadays the second most famous phrase after irrational exuberance to describe the rise of the dot-com bubble. Investors did not just think that the internet will change the daily life of Americans but also the quantitative realities of economics and finance. Thus, skyrocketing P/E ratios seemed to be the new normal of stock …show more content…
In march 2015 the NASDAQ index which primarily tracks tech stocks declined 78 percent (Time, 2015). Although the internet changed the daily life of many Americans, it did not change the basic laws of economics and finance. The dot-com bubble of the 1990’s illustrates that there is no constant perfect correlation between the underlying true value of a company and its stock price. Therefore, the Efficient Market Hypothesis must be false in the short term. Nevertheless, the market adjusted in 2000 and stock prices moved closer towards their intrinsic value. This indicates that markets correct themselves in the long term. This conclusion has important implications for any
The events that unfolded on September 11th and the days that followed also profoundly effected the stock market. It is the purpose of this paper is to examine what happened to both the Dow Jones Industrial Average and the NASDAQ after September 11th and how it is similar to events such as the bombing of Pearl Harbor, the Oklahoma City bombing, and the Gulf War in terms of how the stock market experienced a blow and bounced back after a while.
It was previously assumed that economic investors and regulators (agents) utilised all available information and thus market prices were a reflection of this information with assets representing their fundamental value, encouraging the position that agents’ actions were rational. The 2007-2008 Global Financial Crisis (GFC) is posited to have originated from the notion that all available information was utilised, causing agents to fail to thoroughly investigate and confirm “the true values of publicly traded securities,” leading to a failure to register the presence of an asset price bubble preceding the GFC (Ball 2009).
... shock waves through the world’s financial markets. We more quickly hear and react to financial news, whether good or bad.
Stock is one of the greatest tools ever invented for building wealth. But parallel to the possibility of gaining, there is a great possibility of loosing. The only thing that can protect one from loosing is knowledge about movements in stock prices. Unfortunately, there is no clean equation that can tell us exactly how a stock price will behave, but we can try to find some factors that cause stock prices go up or down.
In 1995 Netscape was one of the first dot.com businesses to enter the NASDAQ Stock Exchange, an automated exchange which has, since the Dot.com power struggle, become associated primarily with technology shares. At that time the NASDAQ was still not considered a technology exchange and Netscape entered the exchange. In 2000 the NASDAQ 100 Composite index peaked at 5,132 points at more than 500% from its original level in 1995. America was in the grip of dot.com hysteria and anybody with little more than an idea could launch a web-based company and become “paper millionaires” almost overnight. It is important to note that the NASDAQ 100 Composite Index only started out at 100 points (Morrison & White, 2000).
In the beginning, the Internet was created by the military in 1958 for their own personal purposes. They had no idea how many people would be interested in the Internet, nor how much the Internet could grow into what it is today. The Internet as we know it today did not come about until 1995. Now, it is said that approximately one third of the world's population uses the Internet, and it is still growing. The dot-com bubble spanned from 1995 to 2000 and involved the entire world. The Internet caused an unprecedented growth and speed in business because of how accessible it was to everyone. Many people wanted to become involved because they saw how fast it was growing. One company that made it possible for so many participants to invest was NASDAQ, the first online stock exchange and is now the 2nd largest in the world. This caused ordinary people to get involved whereas in the past the stock market was reserved for businessmen and corporations. NASDAQ made it possible for the average guy to make quick money, whereas the job market required education, degrees, and work experience. Anybody could make money sitting at home on their personal computers, which was completely revolutionary. In fact, many companies started in garages (Apple, EBay, and Amazon for example). Many of these companies saw an expeditious expansion in customer base and funding if they attached the prefix "e-" or added ". com" to their name. Every business rushed to be the first of their kind, and each desired a monopoly. This, in the end, was a major part that led to the downfall of the dot-com bubble. Companies were rushing to expand their client base without determining a long-term business plan. The whole thing was moving so fast that investors would give thei...
When establishing financial prices, the market is usually deemed to be well-versed and clever. In a stock market, stocks are based on the information given and should be priced at the accurate level. In the past, this was supposed to be guaranteed by the accessibility of sufficient information from investors. However, as new information is given the prices would shift. "Free markets, so the hypothesis goes, could only be inefficient if investors ignored price sensitive data. Whoever used this data could make large profits and the market would readjust becoming efficient once again" (McMinn, 2007, ¶ 1). This paper will identify the different forms of EMH, sources supporting and refuting the EMH and finally evaluating if the EMH applies to mergers.
...ar press, or through existing historical accounts. Through our pilot study, we have demonstrated variance in the formation of asset bubbles surrounding the introduction of significant new technologies. While we find general support for our predictions, the current stage of this work is rudimentary: much work is left to be done.
The efficient market hypothesis has been one of the main topics of academic finance research. The efficient market hypotheses also know as the joint hypothesis problem, asserts that financial markets lack solid hard information in making decisions. Efficient market hypothesis claims it is impossible to beat the market because stock market efficiency causes existing share prices to always incorporate and reflect all relevant information . According to efficient market hypothesis stocks always trade at their fair value on stock exchanges, making it impossible for investors to either purchase undervalued stocks or sell stocks for inflated prices. As such, it should be impossible to outperform the overall market through expert stock selection or market timing, and that the only way an investor can possibly obtain higher returns is by purchasing riskier investments . In reality once cannot always achieve returns in excess of average market return on a risk-adjusted basis. They have been numerous arguments against the efficient market hypothesis. Some researches point out the fact financial theories are subjective, in other words they are ideas that try to explain how markets work and behave.
Risks are everywhere, however that does not mean one has to resort to accepting all levels of risk in the world. Risk is identifiable and as such can be mitigated down to a level where an individual is comfortable with or at the least tolerant of the risk. The stock market requires the use of an individual or business investor’s money and therefore involves considerable amounts of risk. Those who are averse to risk, yet can see the benefits of investing, must due their due diligence prior to investing in a stock that may be considered risky. By using beta and the security market line as tools to identify risk in the market, investors are able to mitigate risky decisions and build a comfortable portfolio that
The efficient market, as one of the pillars of neoclassical finance, asserts that financial markets are efficient on information. The efficient market hypothesis suggests that there is no trading system based on currently available information that could be expected to generate excess risk-adjusted returns consistently as this information is already reflected in current prices. However, EMH has been the most controversial subject of research in the fields of financial economics during the last 40 years. “Behavioural finance, however, is now seriously challenging this premise by arguing that people are clearly not rational” (Ross, (2002)). Behavioral finance uses facts from psychology and other human sciences in order to explain human investors’ behaviors.
In many people's perspectives, the stock market crash in 2008 was nothing positive but a tragedy. Nonetheless, it provoked my interest in the subject of economics, which motivated me to work in the economic-related field in the future.
As the market was crowded with inexperienced but feverishly eager investors who lacked capital reserves, the falling prices produced a shock effect...
Chapter 11 closes our discussion with several insights into the efficient market theory. There have been many attempts to discredit the random walk theory, but none of the theories hold against empirical evidence. Any pattern that is noticed by investors will disappear as investors try to exploit it and the valuation methods of growth rate are far too difficult to predict. As we said before the random walk concludes that no patterns exist in the market, pricing is accurate and all information available is already incorporated into the stock price. Therefore the market is efficient. Even if errors do occur in short-run pricing, they will correct themselves in the long run. The random walk suggest that short-term prices cannot be predicted and to buy stocks for the long run. Malkiel concludes the best way to consistently be profitable is to buy and hold a broad based market index fund. As the market rises so will the investors returns since historically the market continues to rise as a whole.
In turn everything in the present and the future is judged through the stocks as they hold a high importance in industrialized economies showing the healthiness of said countries economy. As investing discourages consumer spending over all decreases, it lead...