Quote from: dooglus on May 16, 2013, 02:52:54 AM

Quote from: RationalSpeculator on May 15, 2013, 10:58:04 PM

He's the only one that can promise it as he is the only one speaking for the majority shareholder, who is the only one with the power to print more shares.

Shareholder dilution is the best way to take away value from shareholders. Similar to printing money.

This isn't about dilution. There are 100 million shares, of which 13 million are currently available. When this went up from 10 million to 13 million there was no dilution. Each share still gets one 100 millionth of the monthly profits as a dividend.

Quote from: RationalSpeculator on May 15, 2013, 11:12:03 PM

Could it be that actual profit is considerably higher than expected profit because gamblers on average stop more when they have been exceptionally unlucky?

I don't know, and it hurts my head to think about.

Me too.

Quote from: dooglus on May 16, 2013, 02:52:54 AM

Everything I know about probability tells me that there's no way of changing the expected profit by changing your betting strategy. "Quitting while you're behind" is a betting strategy, and so shouldn't affect the house edge.

If it did then we could beat the house by all "quitting while we're ahead", right?

Since this is all a bit fuzzy and I haven't the foggiest idea how to even approach analysing it, I'm probably wrong, but here goes:

The difference is that "quitting while we're ahead" means the first time you're ahead, which will probably happen early on with only a small amount bet gained.

"Quitting while you're behind" in this case means you've lost all you can afford to lose, which won't necessarily be a small amount.