You know those money shows on TV where they get these panellists from like JP Morgan or some other famous banks or investment companies, and then they say really smart things about financial stuff?
They talk really fast too, as if the 10 minutes that they have allocated for the panel discussion has a massive opportunity cost in terms of advertising costs and whatever, so they just need to get some answers, and move on.
The panellists are often not actually in studio either. They are from even other countries, but not like small towns usually unless if they are professors sometimes.
Really interesting post!
Usually big cities, like London, New York, and so forth is where they take place. The host usually says stuff like, OK, Susan, give me your outlook for the dollar over the next 10 days, Emerging Market impact, YES/NO?
And then Susan will come up with an even more smart sounding answer, like, “You know, Steve, if you look at last month’s YEN numbers, there’s really no reason to believe why we are in for anything less than a complete reversal in terms of Emerging Market Bond sentiment, so, yes, Emerging Market Impact? Yes.”
Then Steve may be getting to the end of the program. OK, as we usually do at the end of the show, one word answers, you first Bob, “European Central Bank rates tantrum number 2 this summer, yes/no?” Bob may say, “uuhh, I’m gonna go with a yes on that one.”
“Tracy?”
“You know Steve…”
“One word! (laughter)”
“OK, uh, No!”
More laughter…
And the ratings go up….
People love these shows I think. When you watch them you feel like you are part of that discussion, and they respect you as a viewer. I don’t know why. Maybe some TV trick…
You have a wonderful day!!!
Good question, I wonder what the process is for finding those analaysts. And why don't the ugly ones make it on tv?
have you seen that Youtube clip of the guy who they interviewed accidentally?
Good question...
This post has been ranked within the top 80 most undervalued posts in the first half of Jul 23. We estimate that this post is undervalued by $11.73 as compared to a scenario in which every voter had an equal say.
See the full rankings and details in The Daily Tribune: Jul 23 - Part I. You can also read about some of our methodology, data analysis and technical details in our initial post.
If you are the author and would prefer not to receive these comments, simply reply "Stop" to this comment.