Email us for help
Loading...
Premium support
Log Out
Our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy have changed. We think you'll like them better this way.
Why fair markets require uncertainty for both the buyer and the seller, and why sellers don't need to disclose everything they know to the buyer. More information, including show notes, can be found here. Thanks to Wunder Capital for sponsoring this week's episode.
Episode Summary
A recent listener of the Money For the Rest of Us podcast posed the question, “Are there always winners and losers when trading?” This question is the focus of this episode of the podcast. David explains an age-old thought experiment created by Cicero and how it relates to modern financial decision making. The key differences between concealing and simply not revealing information are discussed and how trading decisions can be ethical for all involved. David also explains how high-frequency trading bots exist outside the parameters of conscious decision making and how they can impact market volatility. It’s an episode full of great insights and should not be missed, so be sure to listen.
There’s a key difference between concealing and not revealing information
In Cicero’s thought experiment, there is a grain seller that has imported foreign goods during a period of domestic hardship. Is the seller required to disclose information of additional shipments coming into the market soon? Or is he able to sell his stores at a higher price, without telling the buyers what he knows? David explains that technically it would be an ethical sale since there’s not a defect in the grain he’s selling. The seller isn’t concealing critical information, he’s simply using the current market conditions to his benefit. To hear David’s full summary of this scenario, be sure to listen to this episode.
The outcome of a transaction should be unknown for all parties involved in order to