[adrizzle]

I now have a job now. I was'nt really trying to, but I had to get one to be able to be homeschooled. It has actually kept me from working on business things lately, which kind of sucks. Do you think i should be working even though I am trying to be a Entrepreneur or what?

[BeTheBox]

What is your roll at this job?
How many hours do you work?

A job is necessary for most, many consider it a requirement to be a successful business owner. Use it for what its worth. Manage your time the best you can, and always keep your eye on whats best for you.

At one time I labored in the day and ran cat5 at night, all while attempting to learn what I could about business and launch a startup.

[adrizzle]

i help people get license plates, renew their registration, drivers license and etc. I am going to be working 20-25 hours a week.

[BeTheBox]

DMV

Like you said, you need to have a job as a requirement. Once you get settled in, it may be easier to work efficiently with your schedule. Juggling school, work, and your own ambitions won't be easy- but will be necessary

[akula]

an "entrepreneur" is usually a euphemism for a bum

if, by working as a founder, there is little expectation of rapid capital gains for the entrepreneur, then you shouldn't work as a founder because it's not the most fortunate occupation

there is absolutely no prestige (or valor or reason) in striving to be an entrepreneur. the occupation in it self is simply a lifestyle decision for largely unsociable people (i.e moi) who want to work from home

if you instead prefer to work in a proper career environment with professionals, I really don't see a reason for wanting to be a founder

do you want a shot at massive, instant wealth? trade calls on penny stocks. it's a lot more cheaper, easier and profitable than entrepreneurship

hell, you can do it in your pajamas

[Newton]

Aren't penny stocks extremely risky? That's my understanding, anyway.

Adrizzle, if you have to work, of course you have to work. I do 35 hours a week at my job and have set up my business in my own spare time.

You just have to be prepared to put in the hours.

[adrizzle]

They arent risky if you read about them and found out about them first.

[akula]

Originally Posted by Newton

Aren't penny stocks extremely risky? That's my understanding, anyway.

Adrizzle, if you have to work, of course you have to work. I do 35 hours a week at my job and have set up my business in my own spare time.

You just have to be prepared to put in the hours.

yes, but the correct terminology isn't risky, rather it's volatile

the prices of securities outside of ASX/S&P 500 experience greater standard deviation and resulting betas than securities included in the indices

in other words; risky is unquantifiable, whereas volatility and beta are the product of standard deviation

penny stocks clock higher absolute returns/losses (as opposed to risk adjusted returns) because they are laden with more systematic and unsystematic risk than blue chips

[akula]

Originally Posted by adrizzle

They arent risky if you read about them and found out about them first.

no, that is wrong

knowledge about something doesn't decrease volatility in the price of assets

knowledge might make you feel more comfortable but it won't make a penny stock less volatile

interestingly, it is this human inability to differentiate feelings and arithmetics is what drives entrepreneurs to bet the ranch on their cousin's wacky business ideas

[Newton]

Ok, volatile. They're more volatile, so by investing in them you're opening yourself up to lose some cash.

I know they have higher returns/losses but how do you avoid the losses? You need to have some sort of knowledge. A blind Tommy such as myself is 50-50 to make a profit or maybe even less than that - quite possibly the person selling the stock knows something you don't.

[akula]

very good question

engineers are faced with a similar problem all the time

for example, when building a bridge, it's important to try and figure out how to get the maximum load bearing capacity without increasing the possibility of collapse

build a bridge too big, and it's dangerous. build a bridge too small and it's useless. so what's the best size?

in other words: how does one get the most return (upside) with minimal volatility (downside)?

to solve these problems in construction, or chip design, or a million other things - engineers use linear programming

in the 1930's a stockbroker asked one such engineer how to apply linear programming to trading stocks

the engineer ended up writing a paper which won him the Nobel prize in economics

the answer to your question: "how to get max upside with min downside?" is in that paper and many other follow up papers which cover the subject

for less incomprehensible answers consult these 12 ebooks

print them out, read them and you'll have the fundamental understanding necessary for milking the highest risk adjusted returns from listed securities