W3C - The Share Market

An error is fixed that has hampered trading and valuations on the share market.
The problem originated in the assumption that investment funds will sell their holdings when holding such shares does not make sense any more.

This is the case when the P/E ratio is too high and they are also expected to take their profits when the share value is increased substantially compared to the price paid.

These assumptions always worked in most cases, but as we have seen before, they do not work when people are trying to misuse them to make a profit.

The market workings can be manipulated and players were able to make sure certain investment funds do not sell.

We have seen this before on a small scale but unfortunately, it is now taking place on a large scale and we had to intervene and improve the share trading in general.

Share values will not increase when it is obvious that investment funds should have sold their shares and did not. The share price will then remain unchanged.

Corporations that reached absurd values are repaired and values will return to normal.

Share values that reach a far too high value and are not sold while someone is trying to purchase and it is obvious that nothing will be offered, will be reduced in price to a level consistent with a reasonable P/E ratio.

It does not make sense to have corporations making a loss and have a value of 4T.
It also does not make sense to have corporations with a P/E ratio of 100+ and a very high market value.

At P/E ratio >100, you would expect the value to start declining, until it reaches a P/E value of 50 or even less.

The change is installed today and corporation values will be gradually corrected.

i haven't look closely at my IF, but perhaps we presidents could designated a range for p/e or share prices that we want our IF to buy or sell?

Outstanding.

fun while it lasted...

umm... so you were describing an actual example of reality in regards to economics? Does the world bank, or any other economic agency have this sort of magic wand now?

I would like your documentation to define your terms. What is a "unit"? What is the actual share purchase price when reviewing the holdings of a pension plan? I can guess, but it would be nice if you simply defined your terms. It is sufficiently murky that I just ignore it. and I know that makes me stupid.

Andy why were my posts deleted i had a valid suggestion

Now I'm curious as to what was said, seriously

Did I use the word unit here?
please explain.

shares are purchased at market price if this is what you specify, and there are offers on the market at market price, or they are traded at a fixed price, if anyone wants to sell these shares at that price.

We remove any texts that are misleading, untrue or not relevant to the subject discussed.

If you look at the column headings for institutional holdings you will see the term "unit" used. What exactly is that. When I look at the summary of holdings I have difficulty determining my net gain/loss for a particular stock given the way in which the information is presented. I ask that you define terms so that I can understand the arithmetic I need to do to determine the profit/loss position of my institutional holdings. It is not at all clear to me. Like I said, I can guess but that is all I am doing. So if you simply defined the terminology you are using to label stock information in the documentation then slowpokes like me can understand what we have.

well you should probably start removing your own posts andy because your the one filled with crap.... ive played this game for over a year and i put lots of thought into my posts its just not worth it and it confuses me greatly when you delete my posts for no good reason

"people are trying to misuse them to make a profit"
I would hope that my investment fund will make a profit now

I found it.
a unit in that column is a share.
the title means Market price per share.
it should say so and I will have it changed.

also, most pages have hints linked to the titles of all the columns where there are tables.
this too will be added on that page ASAP to explain the terms.

Thanks Andy.

what is the point of this update.... people can artificially raise values of corps but this increases the P/E ratio... if the P/E ratio hits 999 who is going to buy the super expensive shares when the person tries to cash in besides a multi of the person? why doesnt the GM just get rid of multis?

sure this manipulation could be used to increase the measured Assets of a country but thats not a real benefit unless you can sell off the overvalued assets it only helps score wise and only marginally

if you can inflate the value, you can have a fake CEO and have it purchase these shares at that price.

the fake CEO will bankrupt and the money lands in the hands of the person who created the scheme.

This happened.
we bumped into one multi player who did it and Monday, will find more.

there is no lying involved josias everyone can see that the corps have a high PE ratio..... though i have never seen such large values.... Andy wouldnt a better solution be to simply get rid of multis? track peoples IP and disallow logins into multiple accounts? or is that not technically feasible

im just saying this game could be alot better with restrictions on multis... the GM would be able to allow more player interaction

a question

does the level of cash a company has available affect the company's market price?

yes it does to some extent