Replies to post #18783 on SPOOZ Inc (SPZI)

[mij7]

Gbathat, I have not checked your maths but I'm not surprised at the result. That's why Albert Einstein, well known for being smarter than the average bear, once called compound interest "the greatest mathematical discovery of all time".

[truerando]

Well, my calcs are showing hundreds of billions in 4 years, using a lower return rate than the beta delivered, and siphoning off some of the funds for expenses. But, there will come a point of diminishing returns, don't know where that point would be exactly, but it would have to happen. Also, I believe at some point SWARM, through it's transactions, would start affecting the markets it is trading in. Could it be capable of predicting it's own impact on the commodities it's trading in? I don't know.

Point is, 100's of billions is pie in the sky right now. Too many factors to consider. But, 100's of millions should be achievable.

[Imperial Whazoo]

No point in challenging it... in fact, the power of using daily periods and projecting compound returns was why I asked that earlier question about the formula for compounding. My immediate thought when I read the algabraic formula was that the correct projection was via compounding, which formula I did not know offahnd.

As regards you paucity of replies, the problem is in the presentation of the post itself. Would you mind posting it again with care taken to column order because it is a tad unintelligable in its present format? Thanx

Imperial Whazoo

[Wildman-j]

The main problem with this theory...

is that it is based on the assumption that the compounded returns can be subsequently used in the physical trading. In other words - just because I can trade $100,000 of a particular stock/bond/future/option/etc... doesn't mean that I can just as easily trade $1,000,000 of that same investment. Eventually the size of the trade is impacted by the liquidity (that is - the amount of illiquidity) of the particular market.

[ThSeeker]

Gbathat I would challenge it based on the company's own projections. Apparently they do not intend to let it compound but will keep the working capital at lower maybe somewhat fixed amount. Their projections for SWARM revenues by 2010 to only be $14.7 million We expect SWARM to generate at least $14.7 million in revenue for calendar 2010 with negligible drawdown. This is a projection, but considering minimal risk to capital and our revolutionary trading technology, proprietary trading becomes an integral part of Spooz business and will serve as a demonstration of our ground-breaking initiatives.”
http://www.spooz.com/press_details.aspx?ContentID=97


So although wild theoretical projections might be possible it does not sound like that is their intention. And we should not project such possibilities into possible share PPS dollars.

Just using their own conservative projections should suffice for excitement while not overstating potential that would lead to disappointment and crazing and unwarranted PPS volatility.

Getting in at these prices - I am pumped about the future here.

LOL however that does not mean an individual using the technology could not approach your estimates...ohhh!

ThSeeker