Why Beckham is so rich and why the queen always wear a glove

In the fiscal year 2011, David Beckham earned 29.1 million euro from advertisement while Cristiano Ronaldo, another famous football player, earned 17.3 million euro from selling his image. However, those two players were just still behind many other athletes in the list of richest athletes. Not only in sport do we witness a huge amount of money used to hire the celebrities, but also in other areas such as showbiz, politics…  A pair of Nike shoe has the average price of nearly 200 euro. A contact with Rafael Radal costs more than 4 million euro. It means Nike has to sell more than 20,000 pairs of shoes to earn enough revenue just to cover the promotion cost of Nadal alone, not to mention other celebrities. Why nowadays are companies paying so much to have a famous person appear in their posters? Are we, as customers, moved by such promotion? And does George Clooney influence my decision when I go shopping?

What is a celebrity? How can we become a celebrity? What makes a celebrity different from us – the commoners? There are many ways of become a celebrity. In the old times, you’d better have a talent. You can sing, dance, write novels or swim across the Atlantic. Or you need to commit a heroic act and get a medal from the President. Or easier, you are born in a royal family. Make no mistake, Royal is the highest status of celebrity. You may not know the best athlete of your country, but you are taught and told about your king and his queen since you are a kid. The common point of all those kinds is that no matter what you do, you need to be famous if you are a celebrity. The more famous you are, the better it is. Why was Beckham paid more than Rooney? Because in the football world, he is far more well-known than Rooney. You have a bigger chance to encounter Beckham’s image than Rooney’s [That helps explain why Tiger Wood used to be the richest athlete on Earth]. Once Nike has Ronaldo appear in the posters and commercials, it has made sure that the customers are going to recall Nike’s image many more times since then. It does not matter whether you hate or like Ronaldo, after you see him wearing and holding Nike shoes, you are going to think about Nike whenever you see him, even at that time he is not doing any sport. Pay much for one time, and now the companies can rest assured that their brands will appear in our brain for a long time.

The second magic power of celebrity that marketers have taken advantage of is that we all want to be a celebrity, or at least, want to be like them. In our conception, celebrity is living their dreams. Yesterday I heard that Brad Pitt was about to buy a shooting field for Angelina Jolie as a wedding gift. 3 days ago, I saw a photo of Tom Cruise riding a naked bike, which is my favorite kind of motor. Today, I acknowledged that Messi had just bought a new super car. To us, the lives of celebrities of are far beyond ours. It is a wonderful life when you can buy whatever you want, dine in the finest restaurant, go the party the hottest girls, wear the most glamour clothes that are made only just for you. We want to be one of them and to have such a life. However, of course, we cannot. Some has succeeded in becoming a celebrity.  But the majority of us are not able to do that. Therefore, what about trying to be like them, at least, in appearance? Wear the same Rolex Roger Federer wears, and we can become as gentle and mainly as him. Use the sampoo Ronaldo uses and we are lady killers like him. Dressing like them, acting like them, using the same stuffs as theirs does not make us a celebrity, but it can somehow satisfy the strong secret desire that we can be them. So, why not turn off this tab now, go to an online shop and buy you a shirt which is designed based on Ryan Glossing’s shirt in the movie “Drive”?

The third benefit of using celebrity instead of me in the promotion strategy is that even a “small” celebrity has more fans than all of my friends’ combined. You like Adam Levine? Let’s watch The Voice and buy Victoria Secret because his girlfriend is a model there. I have to admit I watch nearly all George Clooney and Josept Gordon-Levit’s movies because I am their fan. Though some celebrities has anti-fans too, it is not a too big problem because those anti-fans can help them become more famous.

But one problem arises. There are not enough celebrities. And those existing celebrities do not know how to maintain their magic power? Marketers need more celebrities. We cannot expect to see a heroic act or an arrival of a royal baby every day. Then comes the last and largest source: those with talents. So, now you know why there are too many reality shows nowadays. Those shows are created to find, discover, build and create potential celebrities, which can be used to trick us into buying goods. And the more we watch, the more they become famous and of course, the better the effect is. Together with finding now celebrities, marketers have to make sure that the recent one is still useful. They have to maintain the magic power. One of the simple rules of being a celebrity: you cannot be too reachable. Contact and communication is needed to create a friendly image. But too much contact will make a celebrity become normal. That’s why their usual meeting with public only lasts 30 minutes. And only a few people know why royals wear long gloves. Not only for elegance, but also to create an intentional psychological distance from members of public.

And do you how to boost the popularity ratings of a royal family? Host a royal wedding and welcome a new child.

Anything can sell.

Kz and Inor.

How randomness rules our lives

There is a famous saying that has great inspiration: “Everything happens for a reason”. As a logical creature, we, human, always try to find the causes of everything that happens in our daily lives. We try to understand, explain the universe, and through doing this, we can control our lives. When a big event happens, we all think of its consequence-to-be. We try to connect event A to the event B. We blame stock market downturn on Saddam Hussein’s arrest though he had nothing to do with the prices of IBM or AIG’s securities. We try to define success, failure with our own explanation. What we fail to realize is that most of the events happening to us every day is just random.

In a gathering after seminar I attended last March, a friend asked me whether I knew Warren Buffet. “Yes. Of course I know him. What’s the matter?”. He said that Warren Buffet succeeded as a stock traded because when his stock went down, he kept holding it till it rose again. Then he concluded that stock investment should be a long-term game, and that we should not sell our stock too early. It was kind of making sense. “But what if his stock kept falling down, he decided to sell it and reinvest into another stock and made a big profit? Does your lesson still hold true?” We cannot deny that Warren Buffet was a genius in stock investment. And neither can we ignore the fact that luck played a big role in his success. Unless you have some asymmetric information, randomness controls your fate in stock trading. It is no different from gambling. In thousands of gamblers, there must be a big winner. However, that does not mean that big winner must be a master of gambling or he is going to win more next time. And it also does not mean that the losers are always losers. When the next wheel runs, the chance of success of everyone is once again equal.

If you ever watch football or any sport, you may realize a strange phenomenon that the results of your favorite team or athlete is not stable. Sometimes, they have a very big win. But the next game they bow to a weaker team. We try to explain that. When the team wins, we say that it results from the correct tactic and hard-working training. When the team loses, it must be a bad day or the referee does not do his job in an appropriate way. However, if we can look father than just one game or two, we may notice that the result of our favorite team does not fluctuate much throughout seasons. Last season we might many big wins and lose. This season witnesses many draws. But both seasons turns out to have a similar final result. And that result is called mean. It is the average ability of our team in a normal condition and without many big changes. Our result musts fluctuate around that mean. If this time we have a big win which means that the result goes far over the mean, do not be surprised that in the next time we have a high chance to be beaten hard, so that after all, the average result would be the mean. Such phenomenon is called regression to the mean.

Many psychologists agree that compliment has a better influence on employees than complain. But it is not widely accepted among employers due to their own experience. They noticed that when an employee worked well, they gave him a compliment and the next time he would have a worse result. Vice versa, after receiving a complain from the boss, the employee tends to have a better achievement than his previous one. It is indeed true. However, it has nothing to do with the compliment or complain. It is just, once again, regression to the mean of the employee’s work. It does not matter whether the employee gets a compliment or not, next time he tends to have a worse result which can be his average result or lower. The same phenomenon applies to giving complain as well. Therefore, the next time your teammate fail to do his job, remember that giving complain only makes the situation worse. And in most cases, compliment does more good than harm.

“To be king is tough, to stay king is tougher”. That saying may and have concluded one simple rule that we often forget in our lives: “most of the events happening to us every day is just random”.

Good night, and good luck.

Kz.

How lady night works and how we can shop at 3am

How lady night works and how we can shop at 3am

We are all familiar with the lady night, a promotion rooting from pub, club and bar. On the lady night, ladies are served drinks with no charge. We all love that promotion, not only because of the money we don’t have to pay, but also because of its meaning when it is only applied to women, not men. And it also raised a very interesting question: How can the club owners afford a lady night? If the ladies do not pay for their drink, how can the owners get the revenue? And finally, is lady night just a promotion, or a trick that can really earn profit?

The answer: the club owners can make money with the lady night. It is arguably that lady night is usually on weekdays, such as Wednesday or Tuesday. It is to understand, because weekend alone can attract people to the clubs without a very small promotion. However, due to the fixed cost of renting, the club owners cannot afford to open only at weekends. Therefore, a promotion on weekdays is necessary to help raise the revenue. But where does the revenue come from if the drinks are free of charge? It comes from my bill, a male who only goes to bar at the lady night. The trick here is the lady night attracts not only ladies but men also. Most of men go to bar because of the women there. Therefore, the lady night will be the night that can attract men the best. And it is arguably that the price of a specific drink is often set high enough to cover 3 or 4 times the real cost of it. It means when I buy a drink in bar, I am actually paying for other women who are enjoying free cocktails. But are there enough men to pay for the women? Simple math shows us that although the free drinks only apply to women, the ratio between men and women remains balanced. However, cost and revenue is not the only benefit of lady night.

It is widely proved and believed that as a customer, we tend to be loyal to a specific brand. We often want to choose between Pepsi and Coke, Nike and Adidas, … But what manipulates our choice? Why do you prefer Pepsi to Coke? There are many contributors to this: the recent market’s trend, service quality, or, say, which product we used first. The products we used in our childhood will have a strong influence on us. They manipulate what we buy and how we use our money. If a child drinks Pepsi before Coke, he will be likely to prefer Pepsi later in all his life. Most of people can name all the cinemas in the city, but ask them how many cinemas they have been to, the number will be surprisingly small. Why do they only choose to go to one place and use only one specific brand, though it is irrational to do that because the more brands we use, the better choice we have? The answer: changing may bring inconvenience. If we have to go to other cinema rather our familiar one, we have to look for the ticket shelter, the bar, the restroom, and in some cases, the way to that cinema. Though all of those inconveniences will disappear after one or two visits, it can destroy the very first thought and idea of giving a try. Therefore, given the same quality of every clubs in the city, the clubs you visit first will stand a better chance to attract you once again. That’s why the club owners want to carry the lady night, as a promotion, to make the people become familiar with their places, even though the revenue may not balance the cost of it.

That helps explain why convenience stores open 24/7. It is certain to say that the cost of opening during night exceeds the revenue. The wage of employees, the cost of delivery is higher when it comes to night shift, while there are less people buying things at 2am than at 2pm. So why do the stores still open 24/7? Imagine at first all the shops close at 10, which is the time when revenue balances cost. One day shop X decides to close at 12. Though it may get some more customers, the sale cannot balance the cost of opening till that time. However, those customers will tend to visit shop X again, because they are familiar with how the products are arranged and placed in the store. Later, the benefit of opening longer will make other stores behave the same. After a period, that will lead to a 24/7 convenience store. And at that moment, interestingly, no stores will benefit from opening all the time.

It is necessary to bear in mind that everything happens for a reason.

Kz

I am not moral as I think I am [part 2]

Sometimes we read news about a rich guy buying a luxury car. Most of us will read such news with disgust. “What the hell are those rich guys doing? They are burning money, Jesus!” It is a very normal and reasonable reaction. However, how many of us have never dreamed of walking out of a Limo in front of our friends? Whenever I and my friends waited for a belated member in a hanging out, we sometimes said to ourselves that it would be crazy if that member showed up in this car, or that car, or the car coming. When we trade in stock market, the first thing we try to do is to buy at the bottom and sell at the top, though it is a very difficult and risky thing to do [and traders know that too]. Here comes the question: we all know that most of us are risk-averse, why do they still try to do such a crazy thing? Because we want to show people that we are better and smarter than others. Deep down inside us is a desire to be different and more special than other ones. It is called natural selection. A normal male will stand low chance of getting a mate. But what should we do if we are not so special? If we have only a normal IQ, a normal personality, or a not so good sense of humor, why don’t we try some kind of materialism? I used to laugh at and criticize those rich people who, in my opinion, did not know how to spend money. Now, I want to be one of them. And if you have never dreamed of being rich, of having a car, of living in a very big house with swimming pool or eating delicious food, then congratulation, you are more moral than me. Because I want that someday the world will know my name, no matter good or bad reputation.

What is the difference between a guitarist and a banker? A man who only knows how to play the guitar and works 4 hours a day is called a “hero”, a “rock star”, for chasing and living his dream while a man who knows almost everything about the society [sometimes he is able to play the guitar too] and work 8 hours a day is called a “boring man”, sometimes a “nerd”. It is not because the banker’s work is boring that we have the right to think that he is not living his dream. Some wants to play guitar. Some wants to play football. And some wants to play with money. The difference between a guitarist and a banker is that the banker’s dream is not so obvious and not so acknowledged by people. People love the idea that a guitarist needs potential and has to practice very much. It is true. However, who does not? Who does not have to work hard to earn money? Who does not have to risk? I have to admit that I am going to be a banker [if I am lucky enough]. Ironically, the wallpaper in my cell phone is the picture of a famous girl band or sometimes a rock band, not an economist or a banker, though I know they both deserve respect equally.

People hate violence. There is no doubt about it. We hate people who cause war, make fight or murder. We hear about some guys fighting in the street and think that those guys both deserve a punishment. My father always told me to stay calm and avoid being involved in trouble, even if I knew I could win the fight [a very low chance, but existing]. But Daddy, sometimes somebody does not let me do that. I now feel sympathetic for those who fight and sometimes kill. In some occasions, I just had to think that if there had been a knife or a gun in my reach, the guy standing before me must have been wounded. And FYI, if I was imprisoned because of doing that, it was totally worth it. Somebody has the potential to drive people mad. I am stupid, and I do not give a damn about people like me out there because we are all stupid. But selfish people do deserve some kind of treatment, even though illegally. “Mama, I just killed a man”

And if a man kills my family, I will kill him for revenge. But the society must be better than one individual.


kz

I am not as moral as I think I am [part 1]

I am not as moral as I think I am.

I eat meat, but I do not kill. I believe in Darwin, but I love to think “someone” created us. Unfortunately, those things do not make me more moral than anyone else, or at least, than whom I think I am.

When I was young, I wondered why adults have such a bad memory. They could not remember a famous historical figure or the order of the first 20 elements of the periodic table. How lame they were! Now, I sometimes forget them too. How lame I am! My mind is, at the moment, filled with too many things. When I was 10, everything was much more simply. I had somewhat 20 friends. Now, that figure has multiplied 10 times, including acquaintances. I have no room in my brain to remember where Argon is on the table. The same thing happens to my right brain. I used to criticize people who chased after money and materialism. I thought I was better than them. I was, for sure. But I am not, now.

Do we like charity? Do we want to volunteer whenever we have a chance? We want to help people, don’t we? When I was young, I wanted to be Superman, not to have superpower, but to help people. Now, I do not even buy a lottery from an old man in the streets. I do not give to beggars. I do not donate voluntarily. And what if I had superpower? I will try to rule the world, or to be rich.

When I was a freshman, the first time I took a bus I told myself that I would always give seat to women and elders. Now, I still give seat to elders, but not always to girls. I am not turning gay. I am just sometimes too tired to stand and hold. When we finish a very hard day, we just want a rest. What is the difference between an exhausted young man and a lively woman? I do not know. I only know they both need some rest. Or sometimes, we hope that others will do instead of us. The presence of others reduces sense of personal responsibility. Why do I have to do while the man next to me does not? But it does not matter what I think or how I am, people judge others by results and actions, not by thoughts or intentions. There is no difference between deliberately and not deliberately doing bad things. No matter what you think or intend, when you do a bad thing, you become a devil.

kz

someday before 21

part 1

Kỉ niệm 5 năm VN-Index đạt đỉnh [và nhân thể đi học chứng khoán về]

Tháng 3/2007: thời kì VN-Index đạt đỉnh cao nhất

Tháng 3/2012: mới học 2 khóa cơ bản về chứng khoán

Đi học chứng khoán, gặp 2 ông thầy. Điều điều đầu tiên thấy được là khi người ta có tiền và biết cách kiếm tiền, người ta không quá quan tâm tới việc kiếm tiền. 2 ông thầy là researcher của công ty chứng khoán [lương vậy cũng cao rồi], lại là trader nữa, nên đôi khi đi dạy cho vui, không quan trọng tiền bạc. Đi học chứng khoán mà câu đầu tiên thầy nói: “Tôi không khuyến khích các anh chị chơi chứng khoán”. Làm nhớ lại hồi trước đi học toán, thầy cũng dặn: “ Học cho vui thôi, sau này máy nó làm hết”. Cũng là 1 ý nghĩa, nhưng nguyên nhân khác nhau.

Đôi khi ra đường không dám nói mình học về kinh tế. Học kinh tế mà bây giờ vẫn không biết tại sao lạm phát 10% thì gây hại. Học kinh tế không thể giải thích nổi thị trường, không hiểu tại sao quá nhiều thứ. Tại sao người ta lại nghĩ  ra cái sàn chứng khoán? Và tại sao người ta lại thích “chơi” trên cái sàn này? Okay là thị trường sơ cấp là cần thiết để doanh nghiệp huy động vốn, nhưng vẫn còn ngân hàng cơ mà. Thị trường thứ cấp giúp tăng tính hấp dẫn của chứng khoán, nhưng bây giờ nó biến tướng rồi. Bao nhiêu người lên cái sàn này mà quan tâm tới dài hạn? Lên sàn để “cá cược”, để lướt những con sóng ngắn 2,3 tuần, để vi vu theo suy đoán trên giấy trong 1,2 tháng. Thôi thì coi như là một nơi để những người không sợ về già đau tim có chỗ thể hiện. Nhưng mà nhìn qua nhìn lại, rút cuộc cả xã hội được cái gì từ cái sàn này? Hàng ngàn nhà đầu tư lên sàn, chỉ để lấy tiền người này bỏ qua người kia. Zero sum game. Xã hội mất đi hàng tá chi phí cơ hội khi những nhà đầu tư thay vì đi sản xuất thì lại đi chơi chứng khoán. Tất nhiên vẫn có những người được lợi. môi giới, các công ty IPO. Nhưng liệu điều đó có đáng không?

Nhưng đó chưa phải là điều ảo diệu nhất của thị trường này. Điều ghê gớm nhất là thị trường này cho người ta cái khả năng đầu tư mua bán chứng khoán mà không cần biết bản chất của cái chứng khoán đó là gì. Người ta mua hàng cần phải biêt món hàng đó tốt hay không. Tốt thì mua, xấu thì dẹp. Trên sàn, người ta không có khái niệm “tốt”, “xấu”. Chỉ có “mai lên hay xuống”. Không cần biết doanh nghiệp đó làm ăn thế nào, chỉ cần thấy giá đang “lên” [đúng từ phải là “có xu hướng tăng trong ngắn hạn”] thì mua, thấy giá đang “xuống” thì bán. Tất cả những gì được học trong trường thành vô nghĩa. Thông tin về doanh nghiệp không còn quá quan trọng trong cái thị trường này. Vậy thì tại sao lại phải đi phân tích báo cáo tài chính, đến thăm doanh nghiệp? Thôi kệ, cũng nhờ cái phương pháp chỉ phân tích biểu đồ giá này mà thị trường có thêm thông tin. Vì giá là phản ánh tất cả quyết định của người mua và người bán. Sẽ có người có nhiều thông tin hơn người khác [bất cân xứng]. Nhưng chỉ cần nhìn giá cổ phiếu của 1 công ty hôm nay lên xuống là người ta biết được những tin tức xung quanh công ty ấy xấu hay tốt. Đôi khi chả cần biết doanh nghiệp ấy cháy nhà, hay chuột ăn hết thực phẩm, thấy giá cổ phiếu xuống là biết doanh nghiệp này đang có vấn đề gì đó rồi.

Người ta hay trách nhà đầu cơ làm thổi giá này nọ. Điển hình nhất là vụ giá dầu. Mấy ông OPEC hay kêu là giá dầu đúng chỉ có $80/thùng, tại bọn đầu cơ tụi nó phá nên lên tới $100. Lúc đầu nghĩ cũng đúng, tại hồi trước cũng có ước mơ vào làm trong phi đội làm giá [giờ hết rồi ==]. Nhưng giờ nghĩ lại, hình như không đúng. Nhà đầu cơ chỉ đầu cơ trên thị trường tương lai, chứ không phải hiện tại. Họ đánh cược vào tương lai. Tại sao họ lại nghĩ giá trong 3 tháng nữa sẽ lên? Phải có lí do gì chứ. Vì họ tin vào lí do đó, cái lí do mà chúng ta ngồi đây không biết được. “Thầy” có dạy, “Đổ lỗi cho nhà đầu cơ về việc làm tăng giá dầu thì cũng không khác gì bắn đi người đưa tin [Blaming speculators rather than the underlying geopolitics is a perverse form of shooting the messenger]”. Nhờ nhà đầu cơ, chúng ta mới biết chuyện gì đang xảy ra ở thị trường. Còn bọn phi đội lái thì có khi cũng chơi ác thiệt.

Đi học xong về là muốn chơi ngay. Thấy dễ quá mà. Có hết đủ thứ “tools” trong tay rồi, nhấn nút là quất. Thế nhưng, nghĩ lại trong cuộc sống đôi khi có những thứ có thể liên tưởng đến chứng khoán, thấy tốt cũng chả dám mua. Dạo này lang thang thì gặp 1 “chứng khoán” rất “tốt”. Tại sao lại “tốt”? Vì “báo cáo tài chính” rất tốt, đẹp đến từng chi tiết. Có tin được báo cáo này không? Chắc là được, 70% thông tin trong báo cáo đã được “kiểm toán” báo lại là chính xác. 1 điều quan trọng khiến chứng khoán này “hấp dẫn” nữa là chưa có nhà đầu tư nào thành công với chứng khoán này. Với 1 báo cáo tốt như vậy, không khó hiểu khi có nhiều nhà đầu tư quyết tâm “giải ngân” với chứng khoán này. Nhưng vẫn chưa thấy chứng khoán này phản ứng giá. Khi áp dụng những công cụ chỉ số riêng thì tín hiệu mua [signal buy] nhảy liên tục. Điều mắc cười là khi đứng trước 1 cơ hội tốt như vậy mà vẫn còn chưa dám hết mình đầu tư hết nguồn lực, vậy thì làm quái thế nào có thể bước lên sàn thật mà chơi. “Chứng khoán này tốt quá, mình có liệu đủ sức theo đuổi không?”. Nỗi sợ, tin đồn, sự tự ti sẽ mãi mãi là những thứ giết chết những mong muốn thành công.

“Tôi nhắc lại, tôi không khuyến khích mọi người tham gia thị trường này". [Và nếu ai đang có ý định đầu tư vào chứng khoán tui đang theo đuổi vì biến ngay lập tức]”

Tôi - đang - đầu - tư

if you know what I mean

kz

When law corrupts the struggle for equality

Equality has always been the goal of all societies and systems. America suffered a very costly civil war to get rid of racism. From women to black people, most of the world is trying to get Thomas Jefferson’s saying fulfilled: “All men are created equal.” Equality has become an obsession, and that obsession is reflected most obviously in law. All law is made to ensure that there is no difference between white and black, between rich and poor, between men and women. That’s the reason for why we, human, have chosen to prefer democracy to meritocracy. However, law is in-deliberately creating a situation that could never be thought of just some decades ago: some men are now suing because of being sex discriminated. What has happened?

Many things. Among them is the ladies’ night. Why is there ladies’ night but no, say, men’s night? We always talk about equality, but now we are creating inequality: women are now treated better than men. They receive discount from anywhere they set a foot in. From clubs to car stores, whenever the customer is a woman, some kind of a discount that male customer never knows will happen. Is it the evidence of sex discrimination? Yeah, people have their own explanations. That women are weaker and more fragile than men, that they need more protection than men, that they have sacrificed too much in their life. Yeah, all the explanations may be relatively correct. But I am not sure whether ladies who can afford to go to a club are really in need of such protection. New Jersey banned ladies’ night in 2004. At this moment, we are unable to judge whether such ban is right or not. Time will tell. I myself still offer my seat on a bus to a woman, and I still hold the door for them, because I believe that not every distinction – even if based on race or sex - is invidious, at least now.

[It was lucky that the court turned down the law suit against Mother’s Day]

Celebrate the Women’s Day as bigly as you can before it is banned from some extremists.

[But think again, women today are really like that? Many of them are now ruling many nations in this world. Many have achieved greater success than men have. The world is becoming more equal for them than ever. However, as long as those explanations are still accepted, women will still be treated inequality.]

kz