When a
market is not doing well, investors are suffering from devaluation of their
assets, they have to two choices: hold or sell (we do not consider the case of buying more, as we assume their priority is to stop further losses and both are risk averse). They could hold their assets in
the hope of asset prices will recover in the future. Or they can sell their
assets to avoid further losses. To simplify the problem, I assume there are
only two investors making decisions at the moment.
-b+a
|
-(b+c)
|
|
-
|
-b-d,-b-d
|
At the
beginning, both investors have losses of -b. If both investors hold, then their
losses will maintain or even be cut, as when no trading happens, the price will
maintain at its original level; moreover, if there is a new investor entering
the market, this could increase the price . If one decides to hold, the other
decides to sell, then the one who chooses to hold will have a greater loss as
selling could decrease the price, and the other who chooses to sell will
prevent from future losses and limit his/her losses. Both traders decide to
sell, both will suffer greater losses (d>c). Such game does not play for
once, this is a repeated-game. In real life, different investors have different
costs of their assets and their expectation of their assets' future values;
therefore, they will not continue with one choice, though both choosing to hold
is the best strategy can provide the best outcomes in the repeated games. In
general, when the market is rallying together to push up prices, it signals most
investors are suffering losses from the devaluation of their assets.
No comments:
Post a Comment