Is it wise to hold on to stock that has plummeted and then stabilized?How do I simulate a trailing limit orderHow are investment funding valued when invested in a company before it goes public?May I Invest as a non accredited investor?What is it about company performance that causes the perceived value of its stock to rise?Company revenue increased however stock price did notCould ignoring sunk costs be used to make an investment look more attractive when it's really not?Historically, has stock value gone up in relation to corporate tax cuts? To what extent?Why can't we all agree to create a self-fulfilling prophecy with regards to the stock market?To what extent can dividends be seen as an informed and careful conclusion about the company's long term ability to at least maintain it?ESPP--any reason not to go all in?

Lied on resume at previous job

Typesetting a double Over Dot on top of a symbol

Is ipsum/ipsa/ipse a third person pronoun, or can it serve other functions?

Ideas for 3rd eye abilities

Can I find out the caloric content of bread by dehydrating it?

Why is my log file so massive? 22gb. I am running log backups

Information to fellow intern about hiring?

Why airport relocation isn't done gradually?

How to deal with fear of taking dependencies

Manga about a female worker who got dragged into another world together with this high school girl and she was just told she's not needed anymore

Why do we use polarized capacitors?

When blogging recipes, how can I support both readers who want the narrative/journey and ones who want the printer-friendly recipe?

Can the Produce Flame cantrip be used to grapple, or as an unarmed strike, in the right circumstances?

What does it exactly mean if a random variable follows a distribution

COUNT(*) or MAX(id) - which is faster?

How can I fix this gap between bookcases I made?

Re-submission of rejected manuscript without informing co-authors

How do I create uniquely male characters?

How is it possible for user's password to be changed after storage was encrypted? (on OS X, Android)

How can I plot a Farey diagram?

Why was the "bread communication" in the arena of Catching Fire left out in the movie?

What are the advantages and disadvantages of running one shots compared to campaigns?

Are cabin dividers used to "hide" the flex of the airplane?

Is domain driven design an anti-SQL pattern?



Is it wise to hold on to stock that has plummeted and then stabilized?


How do I simulate a trailing limit orderHow are investment funding valued when invested in a company before it goes public?May I Invest as a non accredited investor?What is it about company performance that causes the perceived value of its stock to rise?Company revenue increased however stock price did notCould ignoring sunk costs be used to make an investment look more attractive when it's really not?Historically, has stock value gone up in relation to corporate tax cuts? To what extent?Why can't we all agree to create a self-fulfilling prophecy with regards to the stock market?To what extent can dividends be seen as an informed and careful conclusion about the company's long term ability to at least maintain it?ESPP--any reason not to go all in?






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








1















I own some stock that lost more than half its value. It has now been more or less stable for months, and I'm tempted to get rid of it because I see poor prospects in the future for this line of business.



However, I'm told by others that this is unwise, that this is the worst time to sell -- I should recover the losses!



Isn't this the gambler's fallacy? What stops the stock from going down by another half in the future, again? And again?



The people giving me this advice have no insight at all into this particular stock nor have a particular keen insight into economics in general. However, they present this as if it is obvious fact that everyone should know, that if you have experienced this, then you should wait until it has regained at least some of its value.



What basis would anyone have for this statement? Is it true that statistically, more often than not, a company will recover?



The way I view this, is if I would rather buy or sell stock in the company now. What happened in the past is simply unfortunate (for me), it by itself doesn't have any bearing on the future for this company.










share|improve this question









New contributor




AlphaCentauri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.















  • 1





    If you didn't own any of this stock, would you buy some now?

    – jcm
    5 hours ago











  • @jcm No, and that was my point.

    – AlphaCentauri
    5 hours ago






  • 2





    There's your answer.

    – jcm
    4 hours ago











  • As you stated, (1) nothing stops the stock from going down by another half in the future and (2) what happened in the past has no bearing on the future for this company. Your choice is to continue Buy & Hope or accept defeat. Regardless of which you choose, the future is unknown. Another choice is that if you believe (hope?) that the stock has stabilized and if it offers options, sell some OTM covered calls and receive some income while waiting. It will likely be a locked in loss but a smaller one. Again, no guarantees.

    – Bob Baerker
    4 hours ago

















1















I own some stock that lost more than half its value. It has now been more or less stable for months, and I'm tempted to get rid of it because I see poor prospects in the future for this line of business.



However, I'm told by others that this is unwise, that this is the worst time to sell -- I should recover the losses!



Isn't this the gambler's fallacy? What stops the stock from going down by another half in the future, again? And again?



The people giving me this advice have no insight at all into this particular stock nor have a particular keen insight into economics in general. However, they present this as if it is obvious fact that everyone should know, that if you have experienced this, then you should wait until it has regained at least some of its value.



What basis would anyone have for this statement? Is it true that statistically, more often than not, a company will recover?



The way I view this, is if I would rather buy or sell stock in the company now. What happened in the past is simply unfortunate (for me), it by itself doesn't have any bearing on the future for this company.










share|improve this question









New contributor




AlphaCentauri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.















  • 1





    If you didn't own any of this stock, would you buy some now?

    – jcm
    5 hours ago











  • @jcm No, and that was my point.

    – AlphaCentauri
    5 hours ago






  • 2





    There's your answer.

    – jcm
    4 hours ago











  • As you stated, (1) nothing stops the stock from going down by another half in the future and (2) what happened in the past has no bearing on the future for this company. Your choice is to continue Buy & Hope or accept defeat. Regardless of which you choose, the future is unknown. Another choice is that if you believe (hope?) that the stock has stabilized and if it offers options, sell some OTM covered calls and receive some income while waiting. It will likely be a locked in loss but a smaller one. Again, no guarantees.

    – Bob Baerker
    4 hours ago













1












1








1








I own some stock that lost more than half its value. It has now been more or less stable for months, and I'm tempted to get rid of it because I see poor prospects in the future for this line of business.



However, I'm told by others that this is unwise, that this is the worst time to sell -- I should recover the losses!



Isn't this the gambler's fallacy? What stops the stock from going down by another half in the future, again? And again?



The people giving me this advice have no insight at all into this particular stock nor have a particular keen insight into economics in general. However, they present this as if it is obvious fact that everyone should know, that if you have experienced this, then you should wait until it has regained at least some of its value.



What basis would anyone have for this statement? Is it true that statistically, more often than not, a company will recover?



The way I view this, is if I would rather buy or sell stock in the company now. What happened in the past is simply unfortunate (for me), it by itself doesn't have any bearing on the future for this company.










share|improve this question









New contributor




AlphaCentauri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












I own some stock that lost more than half its value. It has now been more or less stable for months, and I'm tempted to get rid of it because I see poor prospects in the future for this line of business.



However, I'm told by others that this is unwise, that this is the worst time to sell -- I should recover the losses!



Isn't this the gambler's fallacy? What stops the stock from going down by another half in the future, again? And again?



The people giving me this advice have no insight at all into this particular stock nor have a particular keen insight into economics in general. However, they present this as if it is obvious fact that everyone should know, that if you have experienced this, then you should wait until it has regained at least some of its value.



What basis would anyone have for this statement? Is it true that statistically, more often than not, a company will recover?



The way I view this, is if I would rather buy or sell stock in the company now. What happened in the past is simply unfortunate (for me), it by itself doesn't have any bearing on the future for this company.







investing






share|improve this question









New contributor




AlphaCentauri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




AlphaCentauri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 5 hours ago







AlphaCentauri













New contributor




AlphaCentauri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 5 hours ago









AlphaCentauriAlphaCentauri

1062




1062




New contributor




AlphaCentauri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





AlphaCentauri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






AlphaCentauri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







  • 1





    If you didn't own any of this stock, would you buy some now?

    – jcm
    5 hours ago











  • @jcm No, and that was my point.

    – AlphaCentauri
    5 hours ago






  • 2





    There's your answer.

    – jcm
    4 hours ago











  • As you stated, (1) nothing stops the stock from going down by another half in the future and (2) what happened in the past has no bearing on the future for this company. Your choice is to continue Buy & Hope or accept defeat. Regardless of which you choose, the future is unknown. Another choice is that if you believe (hope?) that the stock has stabilized and if it offers options, sell some OTM covered calls and receive some income while waiting. It will likely be a locked in loss but a smaller one. Again, no guarantees.

    – Bob Baerker
    4 hours ago












  • 1





    If you didn't own any of this stock, would you buy some now?

    – jcm
    5 hours ago











  • @jcm No, and that was my point.

    – AlphaCentauri
    5 hours ago






  • 2





    There's your answer.

    – jcm
    4 hours ago











  • As you stated, (1) nothing stops the stock from going down by another half in the future and (2) what happened in the past has no bearing on the future for this company. Your choice is to continue Buy & Hope or accept defeat. Regardless of which you choose, the future is unknown. Another choice is that if you believe (hope?) that the stock has stabilized and if it offers options, sell some OTM covered calls and receive some income while waiting. It will likely be a locked in loss but a smaller one. Again, no guarantees.

    – Bob Baerker
    4 hours ago







1




1





If you didn't own any of this stock, would you buy some now?

– jcm
5 hours ago





If you didn't own any of this stock, would you buy some now?

– jcm
5 hours ago













@jcm No, and that was my point.

– AlphaCentauri
5 hours ago





@jcm No, and that was my point.

– AlphaCentauri
5 hours ago




2




2





There's your answer.

– jcm
4 hours ago





There's your answer.

– jcm
4 hours ago













As you stated, (1) nothing stops the stock from going down by another half in the future and (2) what happened in the past has no bearing on the future for this company. Your choice is to continue Buy & Hope or accept defeat. Regardless of which you choose, the future is unknown. Another choice is that if you believe (hope?) that the stock has stabilized and if it offers options, sell some OTM covered calls and receive some income while waiting. It will likely be a locked in loss but a smaller one. Again, no guarantees.

– Bob Baerker
4 hours ago





As you stated, (1) nothing stops the stock from going down by another half in the future and (2) what happened in the past has no bearing on the future for this company. Your choice is to continue Buy & Hope or accept defeat. Regardless of which you choose, the future is unknown. Another choice is that if you believe (hope?) that the stock has stabilized and if it offers options, sell some OTM covered calls and receive some income while waiting. It will likely be a locked in loss but a smaller one. Again, no guarantees.

– Bob Baerker
4 hours ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















3














This might be closer to the sunk cost fallacy with a bit of loss aversion thrown in. I know it is hard emotionally to "lock in your losses", but that money is gone and it is a new day. You have an asset that is worth what the stock trades at today and that's what you have to work with.



It is very possible that stock might regain its previous losses, but the fact that you paid more for it doesn't make it any more/less likely to than any other stock.



The key is that you have to pretend that you have the cash value of the stock today and never invested it. If you would buy that stock today, keep it. If you wouldn't trade the same amount of cash for the stock, try something else.






share|improve this answer























    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "93"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );






    AlphaCentauri is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmoney.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f107547%2fis-it-wise-to-hold-on-to-stock-that-has-plummeted-and-then-stabilized%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    3














    This might be closer to the sunk cost fallacy with a bit of loss aversion thrown in. I know it is hard emotionally to "lock in your losses", but that money is gone and it is a new day. You have an asset that is worth what the stock trades at today and that's what you have to work with.



    It is very possible that stock might regain its previous losses, but the fact that you paid more for it doesn't make it any more/less likely to than any other stock.



    The key is that you have to pretend that you have the cash value of the stock today and never invested it. If you would buy that stock today, keep it. If you wouldn't trade the same amount of cash for the stock, try something else.






    share|improve this answer



























      3














      This might be closer to the sunk cost fallacy with a bit of loss aversion thrown in. I know it is hard emotionally to "lock in your losses", but that money is gone and it is a new day. You have an asset that is worth what the stock trades at today and that's what you have to work with.



      It is very possible that stock might regain its previous losses, but the fact that you paid more for it doesn't make it any more/less likely to than any other stock.



      The key is that you have to pretend that you have the cash value of the stock today and never invested it. If you would buy that stock today, keep it. If you wouldn't trade the same amount of cash for the stock, try something else.






      share|improve this answer

























        3












        3








        3







        This might be closer to the sunk cost fallacy with a bit of loss aversion thrown in. I know it is hard emotionally to "lock in your losses", but that money is gone and it is a new day. You have an asset that is worth what the stock trades at today and that's what you have to work with.



        It is very possible that stock might regain its previous losses, but the fact that you paid more for it doesn't make it any more/less likely to than any other stock.



        The key is that you have to pretend that you have the cash value of the stock today and never invested it. If you would buy that stock today, keep it. If you wouldn't trade the same amount of cash for the stock, try something else.






        share|improve this answer













        This might be closer to the sunk cost fallacy with a bit of loss aversion thrown in. I know it is hard emotionally to "lock in your losses", but that money is gone and it is a new day. You have an asset that is worth what the stock trades at today and that's what you have to work with.



        It is very possible that stock might regain its previous losses, but the fact that you paid more for it doesn't make it any more/less likely to than any other stock.



        The key is that you have to pretend that you have the cash value of the stock today and never invested it. If you would buy that stock today, keep it. If you wouldn't trade the same amount of cash for the stock, try something else.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 2 hours ago









        JohnFxJohnFx

        35.7k984187




        35.7k984187




















            AlphaCentauri is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            AlphaCentauri is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












            AlphaCentauri is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











            AlphaCentauri is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














            Thanks for contributing an answer to Personal Finance & Money Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmoney.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f107547%2fis-it-wise-to-hold-on-to-stock-that-has-plummeted-and-then-stabilized%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            名間水力發電廠 目录 沿革 設施 鄰近設施 註釋 外部連結 导航菜单23°50′10″N 120°42′41″E / 23.83611°N 120.71139°E / 23.83611; 120.7113923°50′10″N 120°42′41″E / 23.83611°N 120.71139°E / 23.83611; 120.71139計畫概要原始内容臺灣第一座BOT 模式開發的水力發電廠-名間水力電廠名間水力發電廠 水利署首件BOT案原始内容《小檔案》名間電廠 首座BOT水力發電廠原始内容名間電廠BOT - 經濟部水利署中區水資源局

            Prove that NP is closed under karp reduction?Space(n) not closed under Karp reductions - what about NTime(n)?Class P is closed under rotation?Prove or disprove that $NL$ is closed under polynomial many-one reductions$mathbfNC_2$ is closed under log-space reductionOn Karp reductionwhen can I know if a class (complexity) is closed under reduction (cook/karp)Check if class $PSPACE$ is closed under polyonomially space reductionIs NPSPACE also closed under polynomial-time reduction and under log-space reduction?Prove PSPACE is closed under complement?Prove PSPACE is closed under union?

            Is my guitar’s action too high? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)Strings too stiff on a recently purchased acoustic guitar | Cort AD880CEIs the action of my guitar really high?Μy little finger is too weak to play guitarWith guitar, how long should I give my fingers to strengthen / callous?When playing a fret the guitar sounds mutedPlaying (Barre) chords up the guitar neckI think my guitar strings are wound too tight and I can't play barre chordsF barre chord on an SG guitarHow to find to the right strings of a barre chord by feel?High action on higher fret on my steel acoustic guitar