posted by QuakerOatsNTNX up 90% since I first acquired 1 ½ years ago ………let’s see you annualize that return, and do an ROI.
Aces. That's a 90% ROI, or if you prefer, a 53.4% annualized ROI ...
... using non-make-believe numbers.
posted by O-Trap
Do you not know what ROI is?
ROI isn't something you "do." It's just a metric that exists within any financial model that is already in use, whether it's acknowledged or not ... like a conversion rate in sales. By definition, it doesn't involve estimates.
You run the models in advance under varying scenarios to see what the ROI’s will yield, before pulling the trigger on a project. Only a fool would wait until the end to be able to say, well here is how the ROI turned out.
posted by QuakerOatsYou run the models in advance under varying scenarios to see what the ROI’s will yield, before pulling the trigger on a project. Only a fool would wait until the end to be able to say, well here is how the ROI turned out.
Nobody's saying you don't do a Cost Benefit Analysis taking several key variables into account, but that's not what an ROI is.
Again, the ROI is a metric. It doesn't yield things. It, itself, is yielded.
Lol, Quaker
posted by O-TrapNobody's saying you don't do a Cost Benefit Analysis taking several key variables into account, but that's not what an ROI is.
Again, the ROI is a metric. It doesn't yield things. It, itself, is yielded.
…….and you run it advance based on estimates and projections to determine a project’s viability and whether it will exceed a hurdle rate etc…. as well as in hindsight.
posted by QuakerOats
…….and you run it advance based on estimates and projections to determine a project’s viability and whether it will exceed a hurdle rate etc…. as well as in hindsight.
*sigh*
... and that's not ROI. You calculate ROI by the actual, non-make-believe numbers you have based on real-life results.
ROI is a metric you can only measure after the fact. You can make an educated guess as to what it might be once you launch things by using a Cost Benefit Analysis, but you can't calculate an ROI until you have actual data, and you can't have actual data until you have already actually launched something.
Were ROI able to be quantified prior to action, 100% of businesses would succeed, because nobody would start the business unless they were able to calculate it having a positive ROI.
Good lord, man. I don't know how else you need it explained. You do projections beforehand, of course, but projections aren't ROI, and ROI is not a projection.
lmao at everyone.....BOTH are ROI - one is projected or forecast, and one is actual or realized.
posted by O-Trap*sigh*
Good lord, man. I don't know how else you need it explained. You do projections beforehand, of course, but projections aren't ROI, and ROI is not a projection.
Here is a little primer:
“Evaluating the ROI of an investment opportunity is critical, particularly when you’re operating on a limited budget. Using ROI as a guide can help you pinpoint those opportunities that offer the highest potential return, based on the amount you’re able to invest. “
“Calculating ROI can also help you determine whether a growth opportunity offers any net benefit from a savings standpoint. “
“Before you begin calculating the ROI for a growth venture, be clear on what your hurdle rate is. This represents the minimum rate of return you’re willing to accept for a particular investment. Keeping this base rate in mind as you perform ROI calculations, allows you to eliminate those opportunities that do not fit your criteria.”
Class is now over for the day.
posted by gutlmao at everyone.....BOTH are ROI - one is projected or forecast, and one is actual or realized.
I will quote myself from above: "You can make an educated guess as to what it might be once you launch things."
Obviously, you can have some idea on just about any metric if you do enough planning, but you don't actually have the metric until you actually have the data. Beforehand, it's not "the ROI is." It's "we think the ROI will be."
posted by QuakerOats“Evaluating the ROI of an investment opportunity is critical, particularly when you’re operating on a limited budget. Using ROI as a guide can help you pinpoint those opportunities that offer the highest potential return, based on the amount you’re able to invest. “
You do realize that something doesn't cease to be an opportunity just because you've started, right? You're cherry-picking terms that, if read as part of the whole, don't say what you're trying to make them say.
The ROI is absolutely a metric you can use to pare down a wider array of investments and focus more on the ones that offer higher potential returns as you scale.
posted by QuakerOats
“Calculating ROI can also help you determine whether a growth opportunity offers any net benefit from a savings standpoint. “
I'm not even sure why you think the bolded part refers exclusively to the time prior to starting a given financial venture, so you'll have to tease out why only untested investments have growth opportunity or might offer any net benefit.
posted by QuakerOats
“Before you begin calculating the ROI for a growth venture, be clear on what your hurdle rate is. This represents the minimum rate of return you’re willing to accept for a particular investment. Keeping this base rate in mind as you perform ROI calculations, allows you to eliminate those opportunities that do not fit your criteria.”
FFS. You do realize you can run an actual campaign with real data for years and years without establishing a hurdle rate, right? All this is saying is to have your bare minimum ROI figured before you set out to calculate the ROI. Are you even reading what you're pasting?
posted by QuakerOats
Class is now over for the day.
It sounds like the classroom has been empty for some time now.
posted by SpockI am sure that Ptown was for the wall when Obama and the dems approved $25 Billion for the border a decade ago
Ehh, probably. What exactly was that $25B number you are citing?
But, if I remember right, it was something completely different than what Trump is proposing. It also probably included funding for ports of entry and technology/ towers along the border. It was also part of a large change to the immigration system that died due to claims on amnesty and whatnot from the conservative wing of the Rs.
Also, this ROI discussion has me rolling. Thanks guys.
posted by O-TrapFFS. You do realize you can run an actual campaign with real data for years and years without establishing a hurdle rate, right? All this is saying is to have your bare minimum ROI figured before you set out to calculate the ROI. Are you even reading what you're pasting?
posted by QuakerOats
Class is now over for the day.
It sounds like the classroom has been empty for some time now.
LOFL.
Let’s make it real easy: if an organization of any size is planning to embark on a major project, the CFO of that organization will demand ROI calculations under various scenarios prior to approval and cutting P.O’s.
Hope that helps; not much more I can do but bid you a good weekend.
posted by ptown_trojans_1Ehh, probably. What exactly was that $25B number you are citing?
But, if I remember right, it was something completely different than what Trump is proposing. It also probably included funding for ports of entry and technology/ towers along the border. It was also part of a large change to the immigration system that died due to claims on amnesty and whatnot from the conservative wing of the Rs.
Also, this ROI discussion has me rolling. Thanks guys.
Obama wanted a huge amount of money for an immigration bill. Likely inflated with pork because everyone knew it would pass. He wanted more for a WALL then Trump was asking for.
posted by QuakerOats
LOFL.
Let’s make it real easy: if an organization of any size is planning to embark on a major project, the CFO of that organization will demand ROI calculations under various scenarios prior to approval and cutting P.O’s.
Hope that helps; not much more I can do but bid you a good weekend.
You mean he's demanding all the justifiable cost variables and an equally justifiable range of gross revenue, presumably based on other industry examples? Sure. Still doesn't mean the ACTUAL ROI won't be outside the parameters outlined in the projections, which is why you can't calculate an actual ROI from projected estimates. The accuracy of the forecast ROI is entirely dependent on the accuracy of the forecast variables, which can't be known until you actually run the fucking project.
You're basing your declaration of the savings of hundreds of billions of dollars on projections with variables that, by their very definition, are largely undocumented. How do you think a variable with a lack of documentation is adequately quantified such that you're able to put your confidence in a projected ROI? You can't.
Projecting an ROI is, again, estimating what it might be. Not what it is. This isn't Schrodinger's economy. You can't state with resolution what the ROI of the wall is or necessarily will be, because the dividend and divisor are still purely theoretical.
posted by O-TrapProjecting an ROI is, again, estimating what it might be.
You're getting hung-up on this. ROI is just a valuation methodology. You seem to be implying that valuation methodology can only be applied to actual results, which is incorrect.
posted by gutYou're getting hung-up on this. ROI is just a valuation methodology. You seem to be implying that valuation methodology can only be applied to actual results, which is incorrect.
That's not what I'm getting at. My point is that you can't treat the valuation as gospel when the results are theoretical.
I can theoretically create a model in which I rationalize 10:1 returns, but that doesn't mean I have an actual 900% ROI using proven, verifiable cost and revenue. It means I have a theoretical 900% ROI based on projected cost and projected revenue.
This whole weirdly-out-of-place tangent began in response to a resolute claim of ROI. That the wall would pay for itself in year 1, whether it costs $5 million or $50 million.
The point that I've at least been trying to make in this Barnum & Bailey shit show is that:
(a) one of the variables is, by its very definition, undocumented, and as such, not necessarily quantifiable with a confident level of accuracy, and
(b) the entirety of any faith in the ROI assumes a measurable level of success, when we have no means of quantifying the level of success, since there's no good frame of reference.
I'm not saying you can't project an ROI using projected cost and projected results that are grounded on hard data from similar previous endeavors. Even then, you're dealing with actual hard data. It's still not an actualized ROI, so you can't hold a projected ROI as gospel, which was what was happening here, but you have precedent to be confident in the projected metrics.
I'm saying we don't have similar previous endeavors. There is no hard data from similar, previous endeavors, so we're effectively picking those numbers out of the big blue sky. There's no grounds for establishing the level of success of the model because we've got nothing to go on, and at least one variable is largely defined as an unknown.
"Special Counsel concluded the Trump campaign did not conspire or collude with Russia"
Pretty clear and definitive. That's an exoneration, especially when juxtaposed with not reaching a conclusion on obstruction.
Trump tells plenty of lies. But if you look at coverage on this issue from WaPo, NYT, CNN, MSNBC, etc....his charge of "fake news" is actually pretty accurate. I think I remember, at one point, Vegas odds that he would be removed from office within 12 months.
Lol, no collusion. Morons in the media melting down. Love it.
(honest question) Isn't this just Barr's interpretation of the report? And isn't Barr one of Trump's "guys"?
posted by SportsAndLady(honest question) Isn't this just Barr's interpretation of the report? And isn't Barr one of Trump's "guys"?
He stated that the report concluded there was no collusion. Mueller did not conclude on obstruction either way, but Barr said there wasn’t any. So the report has a conclusion on collusion (the big piece) but not on obstruction.
I support the report being made public, as well as how much money was wasted by our government for this investigation.
posted by SportsAndLady(honest question) Isn't this just Barr's interpretation of the report? And isn't Barr one of Trump's "guys"?
I believe Rosenstein co-wrote it. My guess is those conclusions, if not verbatim, are most likely entirely consistent with the report. But the narrative you're talking about will certainly grow to a fever pitch if the entire report is not released.
The bigger question is what will the late-night comedians do for material now?
posted by gutThe bigger question is what will the late-night comedians do for material now?
Fake news and manufactured outrage is my guess
Imagine having TDS so badly, that you are depressed the president didn't commit treason.
Also, LOL at anyone who bought those mueller prayer candles.
I think the reason the Dems want it public is because they're hoping there is some unrelated area that can justify endless Congressional hearings. Mueller wasn't given a specific crime to prove, I don't think, so it's unlikely he found anything potentially criminal and didn't pursue it as out of scope.
If the Dems and their media try to make a big deal out of obstruction, or continue to pursue collusion, I think that would be a big mistake.
I'm still interested to see the merits and what justified all this in the first place. I remain unconvinced this wasn't purely politically motivated. Nunes is apparently beating that drum already.
Schiff is saying that he's going to subpoena Mueller.
posted by CenterBHSFanSchiff is saying that he's going to subpoena Mueller.
Let him. He is a moron. THe voters in this country are done with this. He is just turning more independents into Trump voters
