On reflection I would say that it's not yet "sufficiently clear that they have accepted that they will not legally be President on 2021-01-21" from that tweet alone.
@Anthony I made my prediction based on the res criteria, at this point if the council/committee hasn't met and voted already it feels like ambiguous is the only reasonable option. Quite a bit seems to have been published on this since May 1st such that the council may have changed their minds since then.
This is true at current market prices, with TSLA up 5% to 770 intraday and AMZN down 1% to 3185, and Musk more than 1x leveraged to TSLA due to his options positions.
Bloomberg I presume only use closing prices for their index, but if nothing changes this will resolve tonight.
Next potential questions if this does resolve today: will he still be the richest in 2025? 2030?
I'm a bit skeptical TSLA stays this high, personally.
I don't see much of a case for reaching 2000, it would mean per million daily deaths reaching 29, which would be 50% higher than the highest point reached by the Czech Republic during their Autumn peak, when their daily cases were 1.5x the current UK numbers with double the positivity rate. It already seems like the acceleration in the UK has slowed a tad and the impact of vaccines, prior deaths and what I expect is a slightly superior health service makes this seem very unlikely to me.
— edited by charlesd
@Jgalt Well, of course.
Both in terms of 100% decaying as P(someone passes him) increases, and there's always the chance he's on Mars, in which case I guess he forfeits.
@Pablo I think it's pretty clear that (assuming we accept the statement was by him, which seems very likely in light of his twitter suspension and no denial that this was a Trump statement) he has accepted that he will not be President on Jan 21st, and the wording of the question implies that that is sufficient.
I don't think that criterion was met previously, or that anyone had claimed it had been.
Even if they do go public, any of Ant or Bytedance or a few other Chinese companies could also go public and would likely exceed them in valuation. Kuaishou Technology already went public this year and has a greater than $100bn valuation.
Does this count?
"He won because the Election was Rigged. NO VOTE WATCHERS OR OBSERVERS allowed, vote tabulated by a Radical Left privately owned company, Dominion, with a bad reputation & bum equipment that couldn’t even qualify for Texas (which I won by a lot!), the Fake & Silent Media, & more!"
I think the median case is that it underperforms - the mean is that it outperforms.
This is consistent with EMH assuming a high volatility instrument and a risk averse investor base, however I think EMH would get you a lower prediction than I've given but I've adjusted upwards as I'm somewhat bullish on BTC having longevity as an investment.
Levine does (I expect lucrative) paid speaking gigs at financial companies off the back of his newsletter, which could plausibly be worth a comparable amount to what he could get from Substack and would be harder to achieve if he was behind a paywall. Top tier speakers like Obama and Janet Yellen can make upwards of $250k per instance at these, I don't think it's implausible he could make mid five figures per session.
Source: my partner works for such a company and he did a 45 minute Q&A with them.
This seems much too high to me, I don't know what to make of it except that perhaps people are letting the amount of their mindspace substack occupies anchor them away from zero.
I'd be interested to read the case for this being 20%+
Good question! I do not intend for clean meat to count, but I think insect meat eaten by humans should count.
I'm not sure if the above source counts fish used for fishmeal, I couldn't tell on a quick skim but I don't think it does.
@SimonM I would be interested in a ruling as to whether the premarket price would have been sufficient?
More for the meta implications than anything else.
@fianxu I initially drafted it as 2100, then felt like it was too long, I consulted Peter Wildeford at RP (who had suggested a question about the end of factory farming and suggested looking at CAFOs originally) and he agreed and suggested 2070, which sounded good to me.
@elspeth If public company stocks (as per the SEC or any successor organisation) can trade on them legally and they are publicly accessible, then yes, that should count.
Some kind of CFD or other stock derivatives shouldn't count.
If we end up in a world where there is no SEC or equivalent regulatory body, then instruments that carry similar ownership rights, fungibility and widespread accessibility to 2021 stocks being liquidly tradeable on a public platform should suffice.
@KnowName The problem with the various primary sources is that they don't seem very complete, and an attempt (like OWID's) to get an overall score seems to necessarily consult multiple sources.
Absent OWID right now I guess we'd have to do a bit of work ourselves, outsourcing this to Max Roser/future OWID if possible seemed preferable to me.