<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Inane Posturing of Analysts</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/09/28/the-inane-posturing-of-analysts/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/09/28/the-inane-posturing-of-analysts/</link>
	<description>any technology distinguishable from magic is not sufficiently advanced</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2010 15:33:03 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: robhyndman.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Only a Moron Wouldn&#8217;t Listen to Mark Cuban</title>
		<link>http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/09/28/the-inane-posturing-of-analysts/comment-page-1/#comment-17374</link>
		<dc:creator>robhyndman.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Only a Moron Wouldn&#8217;t Listen to Mark Cuban</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Sep 2006 00:10:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/09/28/the-inane-posturing-of-analysts/#comment-17374</guid>
		<description>[...] Much agitation in the &#8217;sphere today over everyone&#8217;s favourite topic for pointless debate, YouTube valuation. What is this, Web 2.0 whack-a-mole? We spend part of the week scoffing at the inanity of analysts tripping over each other to out-estimate each other on MySpace valuation, and before the weekend rolls in the topic has surfaced in some other corner of the &#8217;sphere, where everyone seems to be trying to outdo each other with assertions of YouTube&#8217;s intrinsic value. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Much agitation in the &#8217;sphere today over everyone&#8217;s favourite topic for pointless debate, YouTube valuation. What is this, Web 2.0 whack-a-mole? We spend part of the week scoffing at the inanity of analysts tripping over each other to out-estimate each other on MySpace valuation, and before the weekend rolls in the topic has surfaced in some other corner of the &#8217;sphere, where everyone seems to be trying to outdo each other with assertions of YouTube&#8217;s intrinsic value. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vera Bass</title>
		<link>http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/09/28/the-inane-posturing-of-analysts/comment-page-1/#comment-17336</link>
		<dc:creator>Vera Bass</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Sep 2006 19:03:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/09/28/the-inane-posturing-of-analysts/#comment-17336</guid>
		<description>I can relate totally to your instinctive queasiness here, but for me its cause does not originate from the analysts. Whether they are publishing intelligent opinions or not, whether they are parroting or not, and whether they are puppets or not, seem to me a separate set of issues from those that initiate my own similar response.

I see the MySpace valuation thing as a symptom of human abuse of unprecedented prosperity. This modern western economy of ours has in recent decades created enough wealth that playing with money for its own sake is a game no less passionately adored than gambling. We live in the magic spell of modern media, the wizard we&#039;ve created, whose interpretations of value are based on viewing individual humans as pawns counted in dollars. It makes me queasy to be one of a million pairs of eyeballs, worth X dollars based on my demographic information (which is collected by almost any entity I entrust with it).

We&#039;re becoming so prosperous now, that billions of dollars in inflated value can be created and lost in the big money game without an economic ripple of consequence felt by the general populace. Meanwhile, of course, elements of our society which are bleeding with insolvency (such as medical care), are increasingly neglected.

In terms of web businesses, it is becoming a total yawn to talk about building profitable businesses in the old fashioned way when it is soooo much sexier to play with the wizard and buy magic, then calculate exactly when to jump with your golden parachute in case the bubble bursts.

Vera</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can relate totally to your instinctive queasiness here, but for me its cause does not originate from the analysts. Whether they are publishing intelligent opinions or not, whether they are parroting or not, and whether they are puppets or not, seem to me a separate set of issues from those that initiate my own similar response.</p>
<p>I see the MySpace valuation thing as a symptom of human abuse of unprecedented prosperity. This modern western economy of ours has in recent decades created enough wealth that playing with money for its own sake is a game no less passionately adored than gambling. We live in the magic spell of modern media, the wizard we&#8217;ve created, whose interpretations of value are based on viewing individual humans as pawns counted in dollars. It makes me queasy to be one of a million pairs of eyeballs, worth X dollars based on my demographic information (which is collected by almost any entity I entrust with it).</p>
<p>We&#8217;re becoming so prosperous now, that billions of dollars in inflated value can be created and lost in the big money game without an economic ripple of consequence felt by the general populace. Meanwhile, of course, elements of our society which are bleeding with insolvency (such as medical care), are increasingly neglected.</p>
<p>In terms of web businesses, it is becoming a total yawn to talk about building profitable businesses in the old fashioned way when it is soooo much sexier to play with the wizard and buy magic, then calculate exactly when to jump with your golden parachute in case the bubble bursts.</p>
<p>Vera</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
