ROI

ToTheMoonStNotWallSt

You need to put in some work. Riskier than shares but done well, they have a higher ROI

Formal-Blueberry-203

But gotta ask yourself what is the ROI on the sketchy things you bought??

LuckyAce369

Gamble it slowly daily for the highest ROI and best screenshot ever

masalaswag

It’s difficult to make a suggestion without knowing more about your risk tolerance or ROI expectations. I like Amgen because I’m bullish on the potential of olpasiran, a cardiovascular medication that will potentially have wide usage even after the GLP craze winds down. Even skinny folks will have lingering effects of poor diet, genetics, or diabetes. But the stock isn’t going to 10x or anything like that because it’s a buy and hold at this point. It’s also not going to go to fall apart like a speculative ticker, either.

pleasestoppbanningme

JD/MBA here.  Your downplaying of the downside risks seems a bit counterintuitive (e.g., you trust your partner, you’re not particularly concerned with ROI, etc).  If your relationship with your partner is great and you're not necessarily concerned with ROI, then why make this post?   You’re concerned about something, or you would not have made this post.  Or perhaps you’re just curious. In any event, and more to the point, the simplest way to avoid problems is to hold the property as joints tenants with full rights of survivorship (JTWROS), assuming that the State in which the property is situated recognizes this type of ownership.  Here’s why. Owning property as JTWROS gives each of you an undivided interest in the entire property.  More importantly, JTWROS is a probate avoidance device, so when one of you dies, your interest in the property automatically vests in the other owner.  The reason you want this is so that if your partner dies and his interest is bequeathed to some crazy, unlearned, contentious, aggressive, \[insert other bad characteristics here\] friend or relative, you are going to have problems, and costly litigation will most likely ensue.  Your relationship with your partner may be magnificent, but unless you share that same magnificent relationship with all of their friends and family members (or anyone else who might inherit the property even if it is through intestate succession laws), you are assuming unknown risk to allow a portion of your investment to be conveyed to an unknown third party who you may or may not know at some unknown point in time in the future. If either of you want to be able to bequeath their interest in the property, then holding it JTWROS will not work.  In that situation, at least get a written Right of First Refusal (preferably with a valuation attached to the property so there is no dispute about valuation in the future).  This way, whichever partner survives the other has the option to purchase the other partner’s intertest in the property and above all of the aforesaid problems inherent in a potential new and unknown investor entering the picture. There are other ways of holding the property jointly.  You can hold it as tenants in common (which is alienable but requires probate and probate expenses upon death).  You can hold it in a trust, which can also serve as an asset protection device.  You can hold it in the name of a business (which allows you to convey interests through private share purchases that do not become part of the public record), but you may lose property tax benefits in some states by doing so.  Aside from the tenants in common approach, all of these will require significant legal expenses to create and to maintain the legal structure (e.g., trust, business, etc.) Lastly, I do not know what enterprises you and your partner have previously engaged in, but you need to make them more formal.  Everything needs to be in writing, in detail, with contingency plans in place.  To operate upon anything less reeks of inexperience and unnecessarily assumes a lot of risks that can and do arise every day. I hope this helps.  I don’t really use this site, so I doubt I will see any responses or respond to them.  If nothing else, this response should give you an idea of how complex the problem is and how various factors (e.g., death, taxes, asset protection, privacy, control, etc) all come into play.   Good luck.

notchatgptipromise

I have money in the market and in other investments. This is more of a "two birds with one stone" thing than it is maxing out ROI. As I said in the OP, we will eventually want to move in, so buying now affords us that later on. Houses in this area are extremely rare. I posted in this sub since I thought others might have done the same thing, albeit with different goals. We would be buying cash, and there's no realtor, and setting up the right legal structure is a few thousand. So diversifying (we'd rent it out for a few years) + guaranteeing the ability to live there later (assuming we setup the LLC correctly and things go to plan) is more interesting than just plowing this into some index fund or REIT or something.

Sharaku_US

Try a portion of your account with ROI app and copy invest Nancy Pelosi or Michael Burry.

winedogsafari

In all fairness, Bloomberg has been reporting than some “mothballed” reactors have been “considered” to be rebooted. All the “talk” has been speculation and there is nothing finalized. With that being said and even “if” plans were executed on to energize a nuclear power plant it would take years of planning, then approvals, then reconstruction / engineering before they came online. OKLO or old plants rebooted is 5 to 10 years out before any ROI develops. Play this accordingly - IMO

LiquefactionAction

The subscribers was a bit of an issue with the Utah-specific project, yeah, but not the only issue. It's estimates for per-Megawatt were like 250% higher than even the Georgia project. And overall, the estimated unsubsidized cost of these from Lazerous was $141 - $224 per megawatt, that's really fucking expensive [https://www.lazard.com/media/2ozoovyg/lazards-lcoeplus-april-2023.pdf](https://www.lazard.com/media/2ozoovyg/lazards-lcoeplus-april-2023.pdf) https://preview.redd.it/mw8e1ie8dpzc1.png?width=994&format=png&auto=webp&s=f41c32c50a6e3322f3254c412b2b61a213135286 And then there's this (before the project imploded catastrophically): [https://static.ewg.org/upload/pdf/FINAL\_NuScale\_analysis\_for\_EWG.pdf](https://static.ewg.org/upload/pdf/FINAL_NuScale_analysis_for_EWG.pdf) >On January 2, 2023, UAMPS released a set of “talking points” that provided a new cost estimate: from the **$5.32 billion, the project is now estimated to cost an eye-popping $9.3 billion f**or just 462 MW of power capacity.xlii In per kilowatt terms, that estimate for the **UAMPS project is around 250% more** than the initial per kilowatt cost for the Vogtle project in Georgia, which consists of two AP1000 reactors capable of generating 1250 MW each (gross capacity), at a comparable stage – that is, when it was still on paper. The Vogtle cost has since exploded from $14 billion to over $30 billion as the reactors near completion.xliii A similar fate may await the UAMPS project if and when construction starts. > >After all, nuclear reactors have routinely exceeded initial cost estimates. O**ne historical survey found that 175 out of 180 nuclear construction projects had experienced cost increases and delays. Cost escalations averaged 117 percent; and construction took 64 percent longer on average than projected**.xliv And the cost of the UAMPS project will likely further increase prior to start of construction, especially if NuScale has to modify its design to address the safety issues identified by ACRS and NRC. > >Even before the recent escalation in costs, NuScale has been struggling to raise investment capital. Its key investor, Fluor, has been systematically trying to reduce its equity stake in NuScale and has ceased to invest in it; as a result, NuScale is looking for other investors.xlv As early as 2019, a senior > >Credit Suisse analyst wrote to investors recommending that Fluor could reduce “underperforming investments,” including its NuScale small modular nuclear reactor startup “which is long overdue, in our opinion”.xlvi The NuScale holding is a very small part of Fluor, which is a large, multi-billion dollar multinational construction and engineering firm. > >As of 2021, the total investment in NuScale has been over $1.1. billion, including around $400 million from the Department of Energy (DOE).xlvii The DOE has supported NuScale through competitive and non-competitive awards, most prominently a $226 million award from 2014-18 and an ongoing $263 million award for 2020-24. In 2020, DOE also awarded $1.355 billion for the UAMPS NuScale project to be used by 2030.xlviii The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has criticized the lack of oversight of these awards; as of September 2022, when the GAO published its report, DOE’s Office of > >Nuclear Energy were still “developing their oversight plans”.xlix > >Despite this handsome support from the DOE, NuScale is clearly in need of much more funding. Specifically, NuScale has created a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) as a way to obtain public money.l In April 2022, two Japanese companies, Japan NuScale Innovation and Japan Bank for International Corp., purchased a part of Fluor’s equity in NuScale for $110 [million.li](https://million.li) Fluor, however, “remains the majority owner in NuScale”.lii NuScale’s stock price (Symbol: SMR) has been stagnant around $10 per share. Capital woes may well be part of NuScale’s rush to get in a certification application France, which has some of the highest nuclear power of any country and the most extensive working knowledge of building nuclear power, is spending $15 billion on their Flamanville 3 project, and most importantly, it's 4x more expensive than what it was initially budgeted for, and has gone from a 4.5-year timeline to a 16-year timeline. And this is a country with the highest amount of nuclear engineers and experience! That's insane if even the most experienced people with a huge working base for constructing and maintaining nuclear can't even do it affordably. What hope do these plucky tech moguls with no idea what they're doing have? Like I actually love nuclear, it's a shame what America did in the 70s-80s shutting most of it down, but it's not a practical privatized venture. Investors won't have the patience for that much expensive, extremely overbudget, capex spending when it can be invested elsewhere for much higher ROI.

Accomplished_Emu903

Where’s the ROI?

_hiddenscout

It could. I'm a software engineer and I think AI will have and continue to have a big impact, but I do think it's been like over a year since OpenAI got a lot of hype with ChatGPT and investors will want to see some ROI or some revenue increase via AI at some point. It's starting to happen, but it does feel like some names have a really lofty valuation because of the AI hype. Investors will need to see more in my opinion in the near future to keep the valuations as lofty.

ddttox

Getting ready to retire at 62. At the moment a 5% yearly ROI is about 30% larger than my current salary and bonus. My house is paid off due to buying NFLX early on and doubling down every time an analyst said it was doomed. But most of it was just maxing out 401Ks in S&P index funds and living below my means and investing the excess.

dritsn

Calls on BA, their ROI in hitmans will be huge

Pretend_Sector685

What the hell is this post? Why is it in r/stocks? It just repeats itself over and over. All it really says it’s that Musk likes Moderna…okay? And? So am I supposed to invest in Moderna? What is the point of this post? The only time it doesn’t repeat itself is when it says biotechnology is the future, which of course it probably will be. But science fiction writers have predicted that for decades and decades—this isn’t a new “aha!” moment. Is this in r/stocks because it is a suggestion to buy biotech stocks? If it is, good luck. Those companies are a dime a dozen. One of them will make a huge breakthrough, surely. But dumping enough money into *that* company’s stock, and no other biotech company which could lose you money, is pretty much like posting in r/stocks about how a $2 powerball ticket has the highest potential ROI.

AmbitiousEconomics

I do flipping pretty successfully and beat market returns, but factoring in my labor costs it's definitely not the best ROI.

Business_Knee6165

That's always the risk! If they can turn it around... there could be quite the ROI on these guys... I still like them a lot and their assets are worth metric shit ton, so I still have faith they'll be OK

ragnaroksunset

The point is that when there isn't a grid outage you are supplying your own power as well as potentially offsetting costs during low-production days by generating credits. The point is that you generate return on investment. If you are looking for off-grid redundancy, that's fine, but please don't act like that's what you are being sold when people talk about how far the tech is coming. It's just something you want that isn't yet met by the tech without sacrificing the ROI that straight solar promises.

Americanboi824

Yup. I bought 100 reddit shares then sold a covered call for Friday and make like $350. For a sec I thought I had lost out on some gains but now it looks like I'm going to get like a 8% ROI in 5 days

Thraex_Exile

I guess that’s my confusion though. Those benefits are greater because right now more money is being withdrawn than deposited, the ROI is significant between SS and investing. For risk/return, that’s why I asked how an entity outlasts its citizens can’t manage longterm stability. Most fund managers recommend your savings be shifted to cash/bonds as you approach retirement. That way, if a recession occurs, you’re riding that wave with non-depreciating assets. The gov’t is an entity with no retirement deadline though. We have to over-correct on protecting our assets, because we need our retirement to be predictable over the course of 20-30 years. The US, barring a multiple decades long recession, can ride market decline into future growth. I guess I don’t understand how it can’t mitigate that risk by always having a portion of SS assets on-hand while the rest is invested proportionally for a stable longterm ROI. We treat compounding interest as king, but then hamper compounding growth through gov’t programs. I get the idea of “insurance,” but when the insuring entity has no expiration date, I guess the idea that it needs to insure itself *and* us just doesn’t add up for me. If the gov’t can manage our funds indefinitely then it should be able to ensure a certain ROI w/o exposing us to massive long-term risk. Sorry, I know that’s a lot and again I do understand that SS is meant to be an “insurance.” I just don’t believe that the current use of SS is the best option to support retirees.

pugRescuer

In tech where engineers are compensated heavily with stock, if they buy it today and use it in future to compensate at a higher value, it becomes an ROI.

TheGoluOfWallStreet

They're more expensive to buy, meaning lower ROI and higher max loss for the same profit target. Also lower liquidity which will impact your sell price

bigwinw

You will never get your $25,000 back if you give it to him. There is not way $25,000 is going to make a dent in $10,000,000. Everyone has raised a lot of red flags so if you decide to do this you need to consider it a “gift” in your head (obviously don’t tell him that) so that when you get 0 ROI you aren’t mad.

pablochs

If you want an investment that pays something regularly, is fairly liquid in case someone wants out, and not so risky, the I’d say invest in bonds or perhaps certain REITs. It’s not sexy and it won’t give a great ROI. But for other type of investment I see only problems to do it in a group. A business is the worst idea as you need at least some knowledge of the sector, be able to judge and trust management, and it’s a very illiquid asset so much so that if one wants out the others will probably have to pay out of their pocket. Real estate has the same issue. If one wants out it’s difficult to extract only his/her part of equity out of the total investment.

Discofootman

Well sure but I mean an average ROI is pretty innocent. I’m 34-40% for 7 years each year.

Antique_Toe640

1. The book "psychology of money" can give you a perspective. You buy a home because knowing that you have a place to sleep at night even after losing all your money, can give you a peace in your mind. 2. If you are really going after the high ROI, then you may compare the ROI of short-term rental vs investing in stocks. 3. Home value + rental income has been giving more return than S&P 500. Check out "rate of return on everything"

astly-dichrar

Same bro, I'm not selling puts but I doubled my amount of NVDA calls and stocks on that day lmao Gambling against NVDA is the most regarded thing I've seen here, even the market is bullish and it doesn't completely understand how far ahead of the other players they really are. I'm not selling these calls below 200% ROI

quarantinemyasshole

>Google and Facebook already are proven to give the best ROI Google actively pushes traffic to Reddit now via their search engine, likely due to the AI data harvesting deal. Reddit will see more traffic over the next couple of years. Whether that results in $$$ who knows, but the traffic will be there.

Special-Market749

Why would any company blow their advertising budget on Reddit when it's cheaper to AstroTurf? Google and Facebook already are proven to give the best ROI, Reddit gives back nothing on that investment

hazellehunter

All that ROI for 2 grand ? 

Zigxy

Yep, the Berkshire model is very simple and Berkshire has very smart people. 1. Find company with good fundamentals and management. Buy it at a fair price. Write them a blank check to be used for high ROI investments (capex, purchasing competitors, and/or making a bolton acquisitions). Leave them alone. 2. Buy stock smartly. 3. Be a lender of last resort during economic downturns. Charge a premium for the Berkshire name and because pretty much no company can move as quickly as Berkshire can with enormous capital injections.

Other-Bumblebee2769

Do not underestimate the power of buybacks... most companies work excellent ROI untold buybacks...Teledyne, Washington Post, Berkshire Hathaway, General Dynamics, TCI to name a few

Aroldis16

Awesome! My point was contectual. He does this every week making high ROI but small Dollar gains and bragging about it while losing Thousands trading 0DTE. He might make $50/week and while a good trade and maybe a 50% ROI over the year he is picking up pennies against the Huge losses he takes elsewhere. This is all designed to draw people into his scam

rhythmdev

ROI in 13.3 years. Looks fine too me. I would keep.

aslander

More lucrative opportunities for returns. The company I work for for bought out by a PE firm. They offered us an opportunity to buy in and I got a 7x ROI within 5 years

BarbellPadawan

Good idea for a guaranteed 20% ROI. Smart. I thought we’re here for 1000%+ daily lotto tickets though!

Humble_Ladder

I do like stock market odds over casino odds. Any urge I have to gamble is 100% satisfied by occasionally buying calls or puts on something I spot that's overbought or oversold and selling them back once the share price goes back where it belongs. Depending on how you define success, I probably do beat 50% of the time finding at least a 10% ROI, which, if repeated on short-term swing plays, could double initial capital fairly quickly. But, I only spot setups I like a few times a year, so actually doubling my money this way is a far loftier goal. It would be interesting to see what would happen if I had no job and stared at tickers all day, but I'm not down with that kind of uncertainty.

EatMeButWhere

Has to be one of the highest ROI moves for them at the moment given lack of other growth

ToonaFish867

I am a regular consumer of Starbucks for studying, skill development, and hanging out with friends. Even so, I don't know enough about the business to give anyone a sure answer, but I do know something that has rewarded me the past few years. I salivate at the thought of buying "quality" stocks at 50-80% discount from ATH for the ROI. Now is the time for us to learn about how SBUX is planning to solve future growth opportunities, to determine if it is a "quality" stock. I am interested in *possibly* loading up on this stock between the $53-65 order block and lower. That will give it over 50% discount from ATH.

Rum____Ham

> It’s pretty hard to come up with ways to spend $110B in a way that generates a high ROI. This sentence and the fact that it is true is such a bummer.

Lcdent2010

No different than me buying one of my partners out. The only issue with buybacks is that it is done when they don’t feel they can invest it into infrastructure or product development for a higher ROI. That indicates to me that a tech PE ratio of anything higher than 10:1 is no longer sustainable. Apple has matured to the point where no new markets are available.

ArbyVonCurlyFry

I can’t wait for this. Every company feeling the need to invest big AI. It’s going to turn out the ROI is shit.

Due_Size_9870

It’s pretty hard to come up with ways to spend $110B in a way that generates a high ROI. Apple is second only to JPOW when it comes to printing money and they are using that money to invest in their own money printer. This has generally offered a pretty high ROI.

Ok-Board4893

> no AI product, no EV, streaming sucks, VR failure  > > just financial engineering and a co built around iphone + peripherals > > at some point market will realize they bought back richly priced shares and there were higher ROI alternatives if only tim wasn't a dork  reddit regards getting bearish on apple, must be a perfect time to buy

IlllIlIIlIlII

>and there were higher ROI alternatives if only tim wasn't a dork  You guys are always shitting on the CEO when the company is struggling XD dude, under Tim Apple rose a lot, they've dumped Intel and made a beast of SoC and integrated their whole ecosystem into a perfection, there's only so much a company can expand, nothing last forever.

iroquoisbeoulve

they've been usurped in market cap rankings in the time they've been aggressively buying back their own stock.  no AI product, no EV, streaming sucks, VR failure  just financial engineering and a co built around iphone + peripherals at some point market will realize they bought back richly priced shares and there were higher ROI alternatives if only tim wasn't a dork 

Worf_Of_Wall_St

And the multi-multi-billions spent on hardware and engineer salaries trying to do things with generative AI. At some point these expenses need to actually produce an ROI.

PutinsLostBlackBelt

In a lot of big companies directors and above are often freeloaders and get cut regularly because the ROI gets lower as they advance. If you’ve ever worked in a large tech company before you’ll have noticed a lot of senior people who don’t know or do shit outside a small area and basically gatekeep the knowledge to maintain a job.

datafisherman

Yes, that makes a good deal of sense. Outside view, their success will depend on the efficacy and efficiency of their sales process. I recalled you were an engineer. I am more of a DIY person in virtually every respect, so I am coming at this from an less informed vantage, but I should not be paying for what I am now, and yet I am. I should obviously just pause my subscription while my usage is zero, and yet I don't. The economics of hassle don't make any sense. This has to be worth something, when appropriately modified to suit their primary market. Lots of businesses just keep paying for the option value or to avoid the switching cost. I will have to look into CLMB. I recently sold SFTC (on the TSX), which does a similar thing primarily for the biggest horizontal enterprise providers. I think they have the opportunity to take a toll on the growth of enterprise AI, across their expanding customer-base, in a similar way that Ogilvy & Mather, the premier advertising agency, took a toll on the growth of the biggest consumer products and brands in the second half of the last century. The Ogilvy reference is Buffett's, but I expect there will be similarities in their relationship-based and ROI-focused business models. The only reason I sold was to concentrate in better opportunities during volatility, beyond the extra cash I could muster. I think it has a promising future. (The company I have been buying is unmentionable here. Lol.)

New_Employee_2506

Investing Short term in the market has a -25% through +25% ROI projection. The rest are outliers. The answer is about half sell at a profit and half sell at a loss.

MeetIndependent1812

What a da indeed. I was hoping for some more upward movement today but might take a while as long as penny flippers trade for a few bucks instead of holding for the great ROI

BarracudaUnlucky8584

Great return, how long were you holding for? Looks like an average of about 165% ROI?

8myDolla

Healthcare - Horse has left the barn. Today you can get decent care if you look. Emergency and critical care is the best in the US. Housing prices - reaching levels where American families will learn to live with each other as generational wealth will not create enough to by homes. Renting will be expensive and will continue where the ROI to LL will be neutral. What that means is that selling real estate will take time but very profitable. Renting will be okay. Gun Violence will continue. War mongering - will continue - we need to refresh our old tanks with new ones

Investiv

I hear you, I just think there are a lot of very intelligent people who know what they're doing at these companies. And if generative AI didn't give them a competitive advantage, megacaps wouldn't be shelling out billions on it. I think they've already done the math and the ROI has already been demonstrated to them, and that's why these multibillion dollar data centers are going up. If it were really just a gamble, they wouldn't all be dedicating this much capex towards it. Some, but not this much. It seems the consensus is that companies who don't spend this money are going to be left in the dust of those that do.

Spins13

It’s money now vs maybe money in the future. There is always the risk that generative AI flops and they built a whole lot of architecture for nothing. I am still very bullish on AMZN, it is my biggest position. I also think this is a good thing. However, increasing Capex hugely is always a gamble. The AI demand is extremely strong at the moment. But what happens if a lot of companies realise that they are not getting good ROI for their AI programs ? Another issue could be that the billions invested today would quickly become obsolete due to technological progress. H200 may make H100 irrelevant and who knows about H500 ?

swim-52

Salary is not a return on investment. It's compensation for labor. If you invest in your business *and* work at it you should expect a salary (which in accounting would go words expenses even though you pocket it) and if your business is successful there would also be profits separate from the salary. You take that profit and divide it by your initial investment to determine your ROI.

ponythehellup

Sorry if it came off like I was discrediting your validity because you are an immigrant. Not what I tried to do. Almost anyone (literally 99% of us) who lives in North America is an immigrant or the descendent of one. I mentioned you being an international student solely because the majority of student loans in the USA are provided by the federal govt. and not available to non-citizens. I had assumed that if you studied in the US you wouldn't have access to those loans. Digging through your account, it's pretty clear you studied somewhere in Canada so your experience with student loans is not directly transferrable just as my experience here in the US is not directly transferable to your situation and experience. 70k debt for an engineering degree actually does make sense; even in the US where some trades pay very well. If OP had said they took the debt for a humanities field (or something else that the data shows to have a poor ROI), it would have made more sense to lay into them for their decision but actually taking 70k of debt for the one field that basically guarantees you an above-average salary upon graduation isn't illogical. I'd actually make an argument that this is one of the scenarios where taking on a decent debt load early in life isn't the absolute worst decision OP could've made. OP's hands are tied when it comes to tuition fees; 70k is a little better than average for graduates from most state schools. US college is significantly more expensive. Looks like a semester at McGill is about 29k CAD. That's 21k US. A semester at The University of Missouri for an out-of-state or international student is 29k USD. McGill is one of the best universities in the world, UM is a respectable but not groundbreaking institution.

AllStuffAround

If there is a house for $100K where you want to live - get it. The interest rates are very high, so indeed you need a much better ROI if you invest your money, and get a mortgage. Mortgage + investment is also a risky proposition. What if you loose your job? Often it happens when the economy is not doing well, so real estate prices are going down, and stock marker is going down but your mortgage stays the same. You would be in a really tough position.

tyros

Anywhere from losing all/going bankrupt (most likely) to gazillion % ROI. High risk = high reward.

semicoloradonative

Some people don't want to wait for the ROI. Quite a few people bought the last dip and sold out with profit, and there are questions about future dividend payouts.

Lumpy_Taste3418

or neither. You don't have an equation here, you just have lines. P=f(t) and nothing else? If you believe price is a function of time and nothing else, investing isn't your game. You might try a price relationship associated with relevant variables: earnings, interest rates, growth prospects, asset base, ROE, ROI, ROA, etc. etc. etc.

BAGross85

Precisely. And I can make a heck of a lot larger ROI by buying in at $500, than at $5,000. But I’ll probably be buying in with ITM Calls around $1,500. Then convert to shares if we bounce from those levels.

Realawyer

I own a restaurant. Opened during COVID. My ROI has been zero. I'm just happy the restaurant hasn't required more capital and I'm hoping margins get larger. Everything has gotten expensive ... Food, labor, insurance. It sucks.

McKoijion

ESPN paid a tiny fraction to broadcast the women's tournament of what TNT and CBS paid to broadcast the men's. Huge ROI on women's sports. I really think it comes down to the convenience of seeing a given sport and the storylines, not the actual sport. MLB, NBA, NFL, etc. rose to prominence because they were free and were on network TV all the time. Now they're getting locked behind ultra-expensive paywalls. New sports that appear in free, easily accessible places are going to get a ton of viewers. That includes women's sports.

Gnat_Man_1112

Probably a better ROI anyway 

bagholdersunited

I'm buying more though. The ROI timeline is definitely longer than 2 years lol

TrajanoArchimedes

Now you only need to make three fiddy to get more than a 100% ROI

Able_Bar231

expectations are high, but I will say the one thing that offers some level of confidence to me is that the CEO spends completely opposite of how bezos was spending. This CEO operates for cost cutting, efficiency and maximizing share holder value it seems. I think last week, the larger trend in the cloud computing space is CapEx is increasing and customer spend is up on cloud offerings this quarter. The ad business is recovering too, so guidance should look good in theory. Meta was punished for their aggressive spending on metaverse once again without a real ROI or even pathway forward for an ROI. I'd say what might dent confidence with AMZN though is the retail spend, given the GDP growth this quarter has slowed down. Personally I'm long with shares, and currently holding some call contracts, though haven't decided if I'll sell before tomorrow or hold through earnings due to FOMC report

justletmesignupalre

If you have to ask what any of this is, you will probably lose your money if you put it in. I wouldn't recommend it. Keep researching, don't invest in what you don't know. Everything has a risk level. Day trading is very difficult and studies have shown that at the end of the day, its mostly luck and/or the same ROI than investing in index funds on the long term. Margin is more similar to an inverse Russian roulette.

Worf_Of_Wall_St

The demand for their products is very real (for now), and there is a massive buildout of data centers happening on the belief that AI is such an amazing ROI that the need for more AI computational power basically infinite. So many companies are just itching to spend a substantial portion of their labor costs in AI projects aimed at eliminating most of that labor cost "soon" or "eventually". These dreams of massive AI ROI will mostly end in failure, but it will take several years for this to play out. I wouldn't bet against the hype in that time. You mentioned Cisco, to draw a parallel a lot of companies bought networking hardware way ahead of their needs because they had big dreams and investor cash to burn, so after the dot com crash there was a lot of cheap barely used Cisco hardware available.

ToonaFish867

I have always had a 401k ever since I started working. The current one is fund-managed, so the returns are terrible. I am up 10% in the last 3 years since the account began when I started a new job. The majority of the profits are obviously from company matching. My self-directed account is making 47% APY. This will, of course, not be sustainable when the world economy faces recession. If I can hedge, sell into cash, or short the market close to the right timing when the recession comes around, I would maintain most of this performance. A more realistic ROI for me would be 25-35% APY with recession years included. I also have a crypto portfolio which has of course performed better than stocks, as long as you time the bottom properly to get that 20-100x ROI. Converted into percentages, the bull cycle APY would be 2,000% to 10,000%.

travistrue

Yep. I think most managed index accounts follow this same philosophy, and even buy into the S&P to some degree to further stabilize those gains. So the question is: if gains can be guaranteed then why doesn’t everyone do this? Mainly cuz not everyone invest and the gains are still pretty marginal to the average person. The amount of money that they have to put down to get a worthwhile ROI isn’t worth the fancy vacation/life experience that they can have right now while they’re young. You can’t put a price on that if you had to put a price on that.

Baccaratfunk

I read for a while, and it seems like on average  the majority of people here make +10,000% on their portfolio and then lose it all?  Maybe there are some heroes lower in the feed? Well I recently picked 5 stocks, three which doubled and, tripled, and quadrupled, including a little penny stock ISUN at .06 cents.  I picked day before it popped.  And . . . I did the same.woth the other 2 but they weren't penny stocks.  I picked the 2 top gainers the day after that.  I used RSI, MACD, FTSO, and VOLUME to screener and then manually sifted through hundreds of stocks. Ok, so why was it so easy for me?  Honestly. . . I can't be that lucky.  But still, that not 10,000%.  Seems like the people here are talking like casino gamblers.  Exaggerated stories.edited to sound like the partially true portions are the highlights and reality of their imagination. I am no Keith Gill . . . I didn't research the companies in depth apart from reading the press release histories and searching for long term expectation allowing room for growth . . . ISUN of course was a day trade pick, not long term . . .  But my choices were perfect?  The 2 that didn't pop off didn't fail and they were also penny stocks.  I use the float now as well. That said . . . I have found a Stock that has potential to pop 2-3k%.   That is like these stories in the thread . . . Perhaps these people are using options and that's the reason for the absurd gains they claim to have lost our of.greed? Look . . . If I am up 2000% on my portfolio in a matter of weeks? . . . I AM SELLING FOR SIGN OF TROUBLE.  Who buys NVIDIA at $40 doesn't sell at $800?  Why hold on then?  You won.  Why the greed?  A stock has to drop to be real.  Look at Tesla.  It will go back up . . . But months . . . Like 12-18. . .  What wait to see if China attacks Taiwan I baffled.by the single.stock investors.who onto what MUST come down who apparently all live here. That said . . .  I am not a professional so therefore I will reveal my Single stock lock here on Monday night . . . I am hoping it drops Market open because every 14 cents right now represents about 15k in gains for me . . . Anyway . . . Coincidentally it had a 1-4 split like GameStop . . . Was way under ranked in popularity. . . . And unfortunately has the potential to 4x at market open before I can place the order.  But basically . .  $500 could.be 150k in 47 weeks. So . . . You don't have to be rich to get a Great ROI. I no everyone want s the 100% gain in 20 minutes . . . But I haven't seen anything like it before. Your opinions?  I am holding the reveal because I don't want the price to go up right away . . . Not that this conspicuously placed reddit post with period thumb will cause any commotion  Thanks to all the honest replies . . . I will avoid kitties, NERD like behavior and Grandpa esque statements . . . Dumb Bunny Out 

lsdiesel_1

Sports team owners sell for way more than they pay when buying the team. What was the ROI for the peewee football team investment?

diytrades

I'm making 3% per month back ROI on a website I bought 9 months ago making $1200 per month with display ads. Site uses a good ad agency and they pay me out monthly after taking 15%. I paid $40k but if I were in your position I would do $20k and look for no less than $600 a month net profit. Your ROI is 100% in 3 years. Buy another profitable website or keep it or sell it down the road. Also you could use the extra cash flow to pay off or extra on your car until its paid off. You can do this passively too although you need someone else to maintain it. The person I bought my site from is maintaining it as he has a small team and runs many sites. Has all been worth it in my experience.

barkinginthestreet

Suggest reading about the recent net-metering changes in California, as well as how the daytime power price went to zero recently. If your ROI is based on current prices paid and payable, and not potential future prices, I would not make the investment. Utility scale solar makes sense, residential not so much (unless paired with on-site storage).

Chornobyl_Explorer

Sorry bro, ain't helping you with schoolwork or whatever you got going on. There's too many variables to give a decent answer and a 5 second Google search would tell you as much. A home is a place to live, it doesn't generally give a ROI. Investements does. Now if you buy a second property you can have a ROI but you'd need to have good insurance and assume at least 1% maintenance per year starting the year the home was built (aka 30year old property, expect a ~30% maintenance cost coming up.)

eolithic_frustum

Shy of 40+ years, but I've got nearly 20 under my belt, and I'm the son and grandson of financial professionals, and I've worked in financial analysis and marketing for about 10 years at this point. Here's advice and wisdom I would give to my younger self if I could go back: 1. The market goes up and goes down, and you cannot predict the future returns of the market. It's better to give up some potential gains now if it means smoothing out the ride up. 2. The belief that you should take more risk when you're younger is bullshit. I would have gladly taken 5% per year instead of having to pay dearly for early mistakes and arrogance. 2.5. You're better off building a base of safety and security, and THEN start doing other stuff that has the potential to juice your returns. 3. I've tried every trading strategy you could name, every complicated option setup you could come up with. Even though I had a 71% win rate, my average annual return was about 11%. I could have saved myself so much time and stress and worry just... investing that same money in long term, buy-and-hold blue chips, ETFs, or index funds. Trading is a fool's errand unless you make it your life, and what kind of life is that? 4. My worst investments were always great investments that I sold too early. 5. My best investments were carefully studied and scrutinized stocks that the market had unceremoniously dumped. "Buy when there's blood in the streets," as they say. Ignore the madness of crowds. 5.5. Don't wait for recessions or bear markets to buy index funds like the S&P 500... but never hesitate to double down when they happen. 6. It often doesn't really matter what your investment strategy is, so long as it has worked long term and you can stick with it. The biggest losers I know are the people that try a different thing every few months. 7. The only things that make stocks go up and down is buying and selling. Fundamentals? Technicals? Patents? Macroeconomics? Inflation? Discounted cash flow models? These are all stories. What you want to know is what motivates *people* on a psychological level to buy or sell. You want to know what "sell stories" are temporary BS that are spooking people out of the market (Covid was a big'un). And you want to know what "buy stories" are sustainable long term (quality, smaller caps, value, profitability, conservative asset investment, etc.). 7.5. That said, solid fundamentals is the best long-term "buy story" you can find. Fundamentals are the closest thing to gravity in the stock market. Everything else is haruspicy. 8. Don't waste your energy trying to come up with clever ways to beat the market. Think about what your goal is. Is it to beat the market? Or is it to make money? If you hyperfixate on ROI, you will most certainly take too much risk. 9. The people who say that the stock market is like gambling or the lottery are idiots. There are only about 10000 stocks to pick. And of those, historically, 21% have survived AND outperformed the market over 20 years. If you've ever taken a statistics class, this is just a basic-ass math problem. If you pick 20 stocks at random, you have a 60%+ chance that at least 4 of your stocks would have gone to beat the market over 20 years. I'll take those odds any day. 10. The only way you can possibly fuck up making money in the stock market is if you consistently do dumb shit: Time horizons that are too short, buying stocks with trash fundamentals, too much risk-taking, no diversification, no safety net, selling too soon, etc. 11. Stock investing won't make you rich on its own. The amount of money you can afford to put in the stock market can. That means that your skills and professional development are usually a better long term investment than the market. 12. Stock brokers and financial advisors do not have your best interest in mind. Their incentives are not your best interest... even if they're supposedly a fiduciary. 13. Don't listen to dogmatic assholes... Including me. Bogleheads have it partially right. Value investors have it partially right. Modern Portfolio Theory assholes who pray at the altar of Smart Beta have it partially right. Don't worry so much about who's right, or what's best. No one can know what will do the best in the years to come. Focus instead on what Charlie Munger suggests: Avoid making idiotic mistakes and you'll be fine.

argothewise

Fair enough. It's generally true though that US and international have traded places in good ROI rates.

Willing_Group7351

Of course they’re going to figure out a way to dodge the tax. That’s my whole point.  Good tax policy = billionaires dodge a bit of taxes but their money stays in America Bad tax policy = billionaires sell their American stocks and buy up all the oil fields in the Middle East because their after tax ROI is better

qw1ns

>Tomorrow Berkshire sold every stock and bought 100% VOO BRK.B is cash cow, see its P/E while VOO is hyped baby (compared to BRK.B) see VOO P/E. In short, for the same ROI, investors pay less for BRK.B than VOO which has extra Risk Premium. Buffet clearly tell that he is not making money from stock market but from the company value. If such is the case, why should he divest BRK.B (higher valued) and buy VOO (lower valued)? That it ends!

Glittering_Bill9176

98.5% non institutional investors. Foreign and private money. It’s a slush fund where foreign interests can get a high ROI.

whofusesthemusic

> job sure can, but seems this insider doesn't think the ROI for holding is there.... Dont worry im sure he doesn't know anything, being the unofficial COO an all....

R-nw-

You see this is where the problem lies. Not criticizing what you wrote, just genuinely want to say that we have been fed enough propaganda and lies to make us believe that too versus bottom crap. It’s not top versus bottom or other way around. It’s all about lifting the middle class. What about tax breaks and social incentives that help the middle class rise a bit more? You are forgetting or plainly don’t know that the golden age of American life was when the marginal taxes were high, so that top pays more. No matter how much the industry or too wealthy individuals complain, they all eventually fall in line and pay up. The benefits of propping up middle class are immense and quite frankly immeasurable. Money in the hands of middle class working citizens means direct savings or expenditures. Which then is money in the pockets of corporations. OTOH, you give tax breaks to corporations and rich people and they will happily buy islands or invest where the cost of production is lowest. Capitalism doesn’t care about America or rest of the world. The only undisputed principle of capitalism is ‘highest ROI’. No corporate or capitalist ever does anything out of the goodness of their hearts. In fact, corporations and these people at the top will ruin and squeeze every last cent of anything breathing because of simple greed. That’s what made them what they are. You expect a Bezos or Musk or the Sacklers to ever do anything remotely resembling public interest? Everything else is pure Chutzpah. Reg your point about bringing back manufacturing and other jobs to America, that ship sailed long long ago. The only way any jobs are coming back to America are with government intervention for there is simply no incentive large enough for businesses to do so. Middle class is the one that lifts top and bottom at the same time. And that’s the way it has always been.

Trick-Interaction396

If US Treasure Bonds fail you’re going to have much bigger problem then ROI. All your money will be worthless and you will be fighting for food and water.

No-Champion-2194

>It also demonstrates the company has nothing better to do with their cash - not a great sign It demonstrates that they are generating more cash flow than they need. New investments will generally have a lower ROI than their current business, so returning that cash to shareholders is a good plan. >It also tends to pump up stock prices short term for management that might want to cash out on options That is simply not true. Rule 10b18 ensures that buybacks are not done in a way that would manipulate stock prices in the short tern. Buybacks are a long term benefit, because the number of shares across which profits are allocated is permanently reduced, increasing EPS going forward.

GiraffeAs_

300% ROI or bust tomorrow 🫡

RoyalFail6

Still beating the ROI of daytraders here 

turingchurch

All investment is tied to rates. If the return on investment, after adjusting for risk, is lower than the risk-free interest rate, then it simply won't happen. If it takes two years to build an apartment, for it to be more attractive than a treasury bond returning 5%, you must earn 5% of 1.05^2 = 5.5% of your original investment. If interest rates are 5.4% (as is currently the case for three-month treasuries), this becomes 6%. And you have to account for the fact that building an apartment building is inherently riskier than just buying treasuries. I see an estimate of $6-8 million for the construction cost of a [20-unit apartment building](https://www.multifamily.loans/apartment-finance-blog/multifamily-construction-costs-an-investor-guide/). At $7 million, you must be earning $420,000 per year to be competitive with treasuries (remember, you must be earning 6%). Divided over 20 units and 12 months, that's at least $1750 per unit per month, and we're not even getting into the costs of running the apartment building. If interest rates were 4%, ROI must be 4.3% and this drops to $1260. At 3%, ROI must be 3.2% and this drops to $930. So as long as interest rates are high, it makes more sense to build luxury and higher-end apartments than it does to build cheaper/affordable apartments. However, these are just back-of-the-envelope calculations, and it's likely that lowering interest rates would also increase the cost of construction itself if it induces demand for building materials. In addition, a lot of the cost has to do with what you mentioned, permitting issues and obstruction; eliminating those can increase construction and lower prices without having to lower rates either.

BothBasis9

New tech never had an immediate ROI. Social Media companies had no revenue for years before they figured it out exploded to the largest companies on the market. (Think Goog and Meta for instance).

Key-Ad331

Is all this spend on AI really worth the ROI? I don't think so.

ShadowLiberal

I've got to agree with you. Facebook has completely lost track of how much of an ROI they can even get with this technology. The more money you burn on R&D the worse your ROI is going to be even if you do get a working product eventually. Think of it this way, the refrigerator was a great invention, and no doubt the first company to bring it to market brought in a lot of revenue from doing so. But how much of a profit did they make off of it? If they spent $250 million on it then they probably made a boatload of profits. But if they spent over $50 billion dollars on the R&D then they were deep in the red on their investment for many years to come, simply because it takes a LONG time to make $50 billion in profits on anything to recoup your expenses. And that hypothetical example isn't even taking into account how new competition rose in the space in later years, driving prices down, and increasing the amount of time needed to recoup the hypothetical $50 billion in R&D costs. Bottom line, even if you're right that something will be a great and highly successful invention, that doesn't mean that there's no cost too high to pay in R&D to develop said product.

Powerful-Call5148

For all you regards that can't read between the lines.... or simply can't f\*cking read!.....  META, MSFT, AMZN,.......MAG 38 = Massive CAPEX Spending NVDA = Emptying pockets of customers UNTIL it hurts and their anoos is bleeding......  AMD = "We don't believe in MOATS, we believe in a cheaper more efficient alternative with better ROI"  That is all. Now go back to your f\*cking Archie comics and your regularly scheduled jerk-off session ....... 

Radiant_Ad_6986

Unfortunately, Zuck has not yet earned the benefit of the doubt after the money pit that has been metaverse and probably are correlating AI investment with that. Poor ROI and unending loses. I personally think AI is different as lots of use cases for AI within their ecosystem of apps, to increase engagement, drive automation, build ad campaigns etc. But will only get the benefits of it probably closer to year end and 2025.

Boomer_here

What is the ROI of a Facebook ad if you just scroll by and never click on it?

skilliard7

Why should they invest in a project that will never provide a ROI? This is just an endless money pit. After 4 years they have very little to show for it.

AP9384629344432

On the other hand, META consistently shows an ability to generate a high ROIC (20s-30s). Oil companies will never match that on a consistent basis. So you have a company that has a track record of generating stellar FCF, and the question is if this particular capex will be a waste. I mean AI or ML or whatever you call it clearly played a huge role in Facebook's success with ads. From the beginning they have been hiring tons of ML/AI researchers and investing heavily into relevant software. I'm just skeptical that LLMs specifically will be an extremely high ROI investment. But higher than the risk free rate is a really low bar imo...

_hiddenscout

Well a big part of METAs bull run was from the idea of the year of efficiency. That’s part of the reason why the stock sold off so much, was the increase capex spend to the metaverse.  To the point though, with all the investment in AI, what will be the ROI. All that capex shouldn’t be required if ML was already working. 

_hiddenscout

I don't think it will have a big drop, but I do think investors are going to want to see some ROI from the investments and all the talk about AI. MSFT has been trading at much richer valuation due to probably AI. I do agree with the fact they are an amazing business and I love Azure, but if they announce or talk about copilot not doing well, I think that is going to be a concern for investors.

_hiddenscout

I mean as an investor the question still becomes what the roadmap? Why so much? What is the ROI of the investment? Also would be curious to know how much of this is actually new versus what is being used from their earlier stuff with ML and what not.

CanYouPleaseChill

It's unlikely that the ROI is higher than the risk-free rate. This is why dividends matter. Less money for companies to piss away on nonsense. Oil companies are spending less on capex than Big Tech. The times they are a changin'.