Related questions
@YourHero "The value of your shares actually haven't changed. It's just the number of them that may look different. @Austin developed this formula so that the stock prices have more fidelity when the underlying binary (0-100%) mechanism is near the top of its range. "
This is how the changes were explained to me. So for example, what was 75% is now: max(log(0.75/0.25),0.75)*500 = 549
@SneakyElbow Isaac dumped almost 40,000 mana into shorting this stock as some kind of troll/experiment, but because of the wonky weighting a swarm of investors eventually pushed it back to around 70%-80%.
The latest conversion seems to have re-calibrated prices based on volume held. Even though the value converted equally, the huge SHORT volume held by Isaac set the price at the low end of this stock's range instead of the high end, where it had been.
Aba is a very popular orbiter and Isaac, the person who owns 80% of the No shares, is defunct. The ratio of YES to NO positions on Aba stock is similar to DAN stock. Given that the NO pressure is reduced by 80%, going forward the price of this stock will gravitate higher over time, unless Aba's status and popularity are diminished greatly.
@YourHero oh okay cool 🙂 I just thought I'd post the info I'd got because I've been confused about the changes and when I saw you mention the 'maximum value', I thought maybe you were confused like me.
@SneakyElbow You're right, I wasn't paying attention to the new formulas. It does make a bit of difference, but the underlying logic remains the same.
@YourHero and @SneakyElbow I'm going to jump in to this conversation since I have a bit of confusion and I just want to know if I am crazy or not. The new formula doesn't make sense to me. Like the numbers it actually displays seem nonsensical to me.
If you try to buy 1 share at the share price you can only actually buy 0.14 shares of BUY.
I own 1 Share of buy (technically 1.01583 shares) but it has a value of M$3393, which should be the value of about 7 shares at the current price.
So while the numbers on the back end might remain the same, the numbers that get displayed are practically meaningless to me since they don't actually convey the information they should. Am I missing something obvious that would make these numbers make sense?
@OrbiterVoltron My uneducated guess is that it mainly has to do with SHORT positions actively counting against the listed value. There are a lot of SHORT shares being held (Isaac) that torpedo the listed value.
I think this makes Aba stock a good long-term investment. By my estimation It currently has more SHORT shares being held than BUY shares, but it is likely that going forward people will buy a lot more YES than NO. The resting price should rise.
@OrbiterVoltron Also, as you can probably tell, the new system is highly volatile with a recency bias and seems to update per mana rather than per transaction.
It's sort of annoying (to me, anyway) to have prices fluctuate so erratically but I think it was made that way to discourage people from making huge purchases. This also means that whatever the stock is valued at in our portfolios will also be misleading, as it is based on the trendy current price without factoring in the underlying ratio the trendy price is tethered to.
Basically, if you buy or sell large amounts of stock at once the price will update dynamically you will lose. Seems like this could very strongly favor bots.
@OrbiterVoltron You are not crazy. None of it makes sense to me either. The explanation I posted above is a direct quote of the explanation given to me in the comments of Dan Stock by someone I assume is on the Manifold team(?)
Tbh, I don't even understand what the explanation they gave me means.
@SneakyElbow My math skills withered away over the last 20 years of not using them but I think a few things are happening. Mind you, this is all guesswork without knowing any of the actual math used besides what you've given.
First, I think the stock price will not be linear, it will become more sensitive to increases and decreases further from the median.
EX. in a balanced stock* 50% to 60% might be 500 to 600 while 60% to 70% might expand to 600 to 800.
*That's why I keep bringing up the SHORTS. It seems like the stock value is also affected by volume held.
I think, to @OrbiterVoltron's query, the displayed stock value seems like an equation of YES volume and NO volumes weighted against each other. It may cost 3800 to buy 1 YES share, but all of the NO shares will cause the final value to be much lower.
In the case of this STOCK, there is a lot of NO already held. A current price** of 50% is probably ~400. As more YES shares are accumulated and the ratio of YES to NO improves, the 50% point will increase and the value will rise.
**However, the current (trendy) price is very volatile. It shows a strong recency bias, with prices shifting drastically as you buy or sell large amounts. No matter the value of a single transaction, it seems to buy and sell 1 mana at a time and the price dynamically shifts as it does.
This shifting price appears to be tethered to a price range seemingly based on an the underlying YES/NO ratio, but it becomes harder to pull in a direction the further from the tether you go.
This makes it very hard to accumulate large volumes in these markets quickly as the price will quickly become out of hand.
In the case of ABA stock, it means the value will be stuck in a lower value range for a long time as shares are accumulated. It will take a long time and a lot of volume trading at 70%+ for the YES being held to catch up to the NO being held. A LOT longer than I initially thought. 😭
It would be useful to know what the current % value is. It's probably a relatively easy calculation that could be reverse engineered.
I also think it may be possible to exploit the current system by playing on volatility and buying both YES and NO to redeem shares. I think the bots will be get trained to do this.
Again, just guesswork.