» » Deep Blue Publications Group | #27538

Complaint / review / scam report
Deep Blue Publications Group

The process of building wealth is indeed a difficult undertaking and the principals involved in achieving its essentially noble objectives requires us to establish some foundational works. The 3 basic steps enumerated in Deep Blue Publications Group’s homepage somehow provides a beginning investor a natural way achieving that goal we have in terms of wealth, namely: Build knowledge. Build confidence. Build wealth.
Knowledge is essential in all human endeavors. The website presents the elementary information any potential investor needs to build wealth. And, when we think of it, even the final step (and goal) of “building wealth” is a continuing process of not merely making what you have in the beginning to grow but also assuring that what you gain along the way remains. Otherwise, building wealth that can be easily lost or is under risk of being diminished, at the least, defeats the entire purpose of building wealth. Building precisely means successful, progressive accumulation of income from an enterprise.

This continuing increase and maintenance of wealth – whether a little or great wealth -- is everyone’s goal in life. Deep Blue assures readers that what the website presents are established on “statistical analysis and conservative intrinsic assessment”. Hence, the creation of wealth is seen as a long-term, gradual incremental effort to achieve financial stability using tested investing principles.

This is what Deep Blue aims to provide for its clients in helping them achieve their goals.
But how effective are these principles in reality? How sure are we that these advices are effective tools anyone can use in any economic system existing on this planet? But these are rather engaging questions that require a similarly involved scrutiny to attain the answers.

The website, however, provides valuable fundamental knowledge for every beginner in the stock investing industry. It is true in its mission to build up that essential knowledge needed for building wealth. The 9 common questions about the stock market slowly guide a tyro into a proper comprehension of and appreciation for its basic nature, its components and its functions.
Author: AntonCarter02

Country: Germany   Province: Canada   City: Frankhurt
Site: deepbluegroup.org/value.html

Category: Business & Finance


NancieLarocca December 9, 2013 9:02 PM
The phrase “low-risk wealth creation”, in describing stock investing, seems to provide a positive motivation for anxious beginners in spite of the initial statement that it is a rather difficult endeavor. Perhaps, compared to other enterprises where more tangible and intangible resources and factors come into play, this process is comparatively less daunting. In that sense, one risks one’s money without having to directly involve other people or material resources into the picture. But this seems like an empty promise since the stock market, in reality, also involves some other, if not more, people and other resources that may seem invisible to majority of people.
Mattrein Howard December 11, 2013 9:10 PM
“When you consider the stock market as a venue for producing wealth, you can concentrate on financial strategies that will help you achieve this goal.” Was the stock market really originally designed to create wealth for “investors” or was it ingeniously invented to make money for the “inventors”? As you yourself mentioned, the stock market is often seen as “some kind of a casino”. Did the casinos put up their business to lose money to the gamblers? I don’t think so! So did the stock market pioneers (and the present operators as well) think of giving up potential wealth they could gain themselves in favour of others? Or is it through the money of other people investing that they create wealth for themselves as well? It seems unlikely that they also provide themselves the opportunity to create wealth by investing in the market they created. Unless, like a horse-racing track owner who rigs a race to make money on a certain horse, the stock market operators manipulate the prices of stocks, which seems such a difficult job to pull off. There must be a trade secret somewhere there, isn’t there?
OrlandoPassarelli December 16, 2013 9:26 PM
But why should an ordinary investor care if stock markets make more money than anyone else as long as an investor can make money out of the markets? The opportunity is there, grab it!
DarrenAdame December 16, 2013 9:41 PM
Like most gamblers anyway, it is not the winning that matters but the challenge of the game. The opportunity to create strategies in the pursuit of wealth is akin to any other kind of adventure. You aim to win. The thought of losing, like in any game, is part of the risks of meeting a challenge.
minatalmadge December 20, 2013 7:25 PM
For me, it is the privilege to become part of a company, especially famous ones, that makes the stock market a social and financial leveller. Wasn’t it the ordinary folks who blazed the trail to California gold and established one of the riches places in the world? There’s gold in them that tills!
timothygolds December 22, 2013 11:36 PM
The picture of the stock market as a kind of supermarket is quite apropos. Stocks and shares are the products anyone can buy or sell and these packages do represent so many real products as well as services in the external economic world.

This happens in real life, much more so now than in older days. Consider the warehouse-type supermarkets where people can buy in bulk or wholesale at a much cheaper prices. Many of the buyers do have their own retail businesses where they sell the products they buy from those warehouse store. It is a stable wealth creator. However, the stock market is not a 100% wealth creator, unless of course, one has mastered and perfected the strategies of the industry like Warren Buffet has. Even retailers have to follow certain strategies to make money on their investments.

Hence, the metaphor still applies.

The main difference is the fact that stock markets often require investors to wait out for a certain period until the best time to sell stocks arrives. But wait! This also happens to retailers who horde certain goods or products for months and years until a crisis or a slump in supply allows them to jack up their prices. However, such a gambit is frowned upon by governments and can be considered economic sabotage, especially if we are talking about essential goods, such as staple grains or ingredients of primary products such as flour and sugar.

Perhaps, this is where stock markets may be playing around with investors’ money: They know of certain political or economies policies that are clandestinely leaked by legislators or policy-

makers that have future impact on the economy of a country or of the globe. Consider oil, steel, coal, solar power, gold and other prime commodities that could be manipulated by a conniving government, business-people and stock market operators in order to favour a few people in the know. It is not an impossible scenario.

Loridowns December 25, 2013 7:12 PM
Somehow, I can agree with this article. Considering what is happening in the global economy, the powers-that-be must be behind all this economic collapse of nations. Just this morning, the Koch brothers of the US have been accused of causing the shutdown of their government by encouraging Republicans to withdraw support for Obama’s health care program. If governments can be manipulated, as it seems the case here, why not the stock market?
sophiamendeleys December 29, 2013 11:30 PM
The stock market is too complex to comprehend at one glance. This website is too elementary to provide a working grasp of its dynamics and its effects on the social-economic political environment. Yes, it is a mere arm of the whole body of an organic nation; but it still defies explanation just as it is difficult to presume that the arm can be manipulated by any other organ except for the brain. The nation’s brain is the totality of the people creating a common decision through their government. The crisis we are undergoing on a global scale may be attributed to a few powerful players; but in the end, we will all be part of the solution to this common dilemma.
pegyoung January 1, 2014 7:20 PM
This reminds me of how a monopoly works. In the 60’s and 70’s, when monopolies reached the peak of their golden reign, people began questioning their existence and led to their eventual “downfall”. In reality, the owners of those monopolies merely shifted to a more democratic way of maintaining their wealth and becoming even richer. Either they merged with other monopolies or allowed others to invest in their business through the stock market while maintaining their complete control over the business. In some cases, they turned over management to new ones and shifted or dissipated the public’s ire to those people. Who knows if the stock market is just another tool to keep our minds pliable while the monopolists continue to fleece us dry?
TedSigler January 2, 2014 9:00 PM
“The stock market only establishes the price of a stock, not its value. Value is evaluated by diligent evaluation of a company and its financial statements.”
The stock market works on the basis of the price of a single share of stock. This is essentially the “tag price” in what is called the giant supermarket that is the stock market. Beyond that “tag price”, however, is the concept of the value of a company. We can see here the root of the stock market’s existence and potential source for creating wealth for people.

When a company undervalues its share price, it is for a particular reason or certain reasons only known to the company. We can only surmise what those reasons are since the website does not go into the matter in depth. The main possible reason is what we believe keeps the stock market alive: To allow investors to discover for themselves the real value of the company based on a meticulous evaluation of the company’s true worth. This is the “scientific” side of stock market investing. What is also called the “fundamentals”.
But at first glance, undervaluing the share price is counterproductive. Why should a company do that when the primary purpose of issuing stocks is to acquire capital for business expansion?
Or is this used as an excuse to favor certain investors who are in the know and thus gain substantial profit in the future when the company’s share price has significantly risen? This further abets the suspicion that the stock market is really a kind of card game which favors the card dealers and not the players.
But, on the other hand, undervaluing the share price can be utilized as an opportunity to attract investors. It is no different from introducing a new product at a promotional price in order to attract more buyers. This is a common business strategy and could be the real motivation for new companies issuing shares at bargain prices. At par value or at overstated share prices, a company’s stocks will have a more difficult time getting more buyers than if it issues shares at undervalued prices. This is a more reasonable motivation for this apparent strategy taken by companies
isabelsheriff January 3, 2014 9:00 PM
As in most legit venture or undertaking, corrupt or dishonest practices will somehow creep in. We can never know the motivations of individual businesses or entities. This faulty human nature has made enterprises, governments, cities and nations basically what they are – melting pots of human goodness and perversity, and everything else in between.
marysmirf January 4, 2014 8:05 PM
So, which is which? Is the stock market a legitimate channel for creating wealth or just another playground for the rich to make more money? Perhaps, we will never know. As long as a gambler takes home some winning now and then and has fun playing, what does it matter if the casino earns millions?
ShelleyGomes January 5, 2014 11:52 PM
That is precisely what makes investing such an exciting endeavour. These are real companies with dynamic “personalities” not unlike choosing a potential spouse or employee in whom you will invest emotions or time and money in a long-term relationship. It is not mainly about making a profit but about spending time evaluating the conflicting forces within a dramatic story and becoming part of the effort of achieving a happy ending.
HelenMinich January 7, 2014 12:57 AM
Money has no emotions. It is as dead as the tree it came from. And, yes, it makes the world go round. Unless we learn the tricks of building wealth, we will see only dead trees and not money.
marshallbrein January 8, 2014 12:27 AM
With the global economic disasters happening quite so often now and toppling what once were stable societies, we can only hope that the present economic structures are still viable. Perhaps, they have served their purposes. Maybe, it is time to innovate and come up with more people-friendly and wealth-dispersing enterprises that will promote the trickling down of the “fat of the land” to the majority of the population and not confined among the few elite, as it is.
JoshuaHafer January 8, 2014 7:12 PM
What is the difference between borrowing money from a bank and issuing shares of stocks? Borrowing is a less messy way of raising capital, first of all. A company will need only to satisfy a bank’s requirements whereas, issuing shares will involve so many people who have a stake in the company’s stability or ability to grow. Of course, there is the loan interest which may deter a company from getting sufficient loans or from handling the payment of the loan based on its profitability.

Issuing stocks, although it frees a company from paying interests also involves a lot of risks plus the concomitant burden of maintaining a company’s profitability in order to enhance its share price – a duty to its investors. Social and political conditions will impact on the value of stocks.

But in the same way, these forces will also affect the profitability of a company that opts to take out a loan. Generally speaking, of course. For even in times of calamities or disasters or even economic crises, there are companies that may thrive on those adverse conditions, such as funeral homes during a tsunami or hospitals after an epidemic.

Exceptions aside, the choice between borrowing and issuing stocks is a policy decision that may involve more than financial factors. Apple is one of those companies that do not issue dividends to its investors and yet has shown consistent financial health for many years. People still buy their shares because they know the value of the company from its track record of excellent performance. In such a case, borrowing is out of the question; unless, of course, the company or, any company for that matter, needs a substantial amount of money for expansion. It may issue more shares to augment its capital needs; but it will diminish the shares held by the majority owners who may not want to part with that clout. In fact, it may borrow money from a bank in order to buy all out the shares from investors and gain more or total control over the company.
LindaFarris January 9, 2014 2:17 AM
In the end, the game is one of upmanship. Gain as much as you can. But in the process, you may have to part with some of you gains temporarily. And when the time is right, you can get back everything and end up having more than what you had in the beginning. The fittest becomes the fattest!
sernatimothy January 9, 2014 7:40 PM
The banks and the stock market are merely tools for wealth creation. Whereas banks nowadays have lost much of their credibility as institutions, like the stock market, it has maintained its capability to provide investors with the opportunity to produce wealth. The opportunities given to the ordinary citizens, although very limited, still allow them to invest their earnings or acquire loans for the purpose of enhancing their wealth.
SarahWilkerson January 10, 2014 8:19 PM
True. We used to look at the bank owners and officials as some kind of gods. In like manner, with the present economic debacle, we have ceased to adore Wall-Street-types of workers as demi-gods as well. Until people cease to trust these institutions entirely and bring them crashing down finally, they will continue to attract investors. I say, it may be time for some new form of creating wealth for more people.
carmendoffelt January 10, 2014 11:35 PM
It is a time of revolutionary reforms in all aspects of society. More so in the economicenvironment. But will the stock market be sensitive to the rumblings of this radical turmoil?
FredrickWalker January 11, 2014 2:00 AM
The solid foundations of the economic institutions may crack as they have in the past; but they will continue to stand and withstand the changes brought about by the present conditions. Primarily, these changes are no different from what had occurred in the past. The only difference is that in the past, most of the players involved were mainly individuals or institutions. Today, we are dealing with nations and regions of diverse cultural and political characters. It is more than an economic problem but a wider and more wholistic phenomenon which involves geological, cultural, political, social, physiological, psychological and spiritual factors. Money no longer runs the world but the totality of the needs and aspirations of the whole human being. With billions of them, we can see how complex a problem that can be.
sarahwil January 12, 2014 8:13 PM
The individual investor, particularly the newcomer, has so much to learn about the workings of the stock market in its essence and in its continuing dynamics. It all hinges on how much one knows about the present conditions of a company and the environment in which it evolves, first of all, and how much one knows of the future of the same conditions. It is like entering into a marriage. One never knows what will happen based only on what one knows about himself and the other person. One can only hope that the other person remains as faithful or as loving and as lovable from the beginning. The unseen surrounding forces that will affect those “must have” conditions for a happy marriage will serve as challenges for the union.

Hence, unless one comprehends clearly the fundamentals and gains a solid evaluation of a company’s value (and a spouse is basically a “company”), a long-lasting romantic or business relationship will not exist.

Thankfully, much of the guess work of investing in stocks has been diminished with the use of technology. In fact, the whole process of buying and selling shares can now be done through the Internet. The presence of websites like this is proof of the growing centralization of almost all human activities toward a web-based network. Legitimate and illicit business activities both occur through the use of online or mobile applications. There is no longer any excuse for people not to be part of this growing potential for making a profit the easy way. More so with stock investing.

Considering this development, the value of educating oneself through the Internet is an open invitation one cannot dismiss readily. In fact, the tech has more advantages compared to the traditional classroom setting. One can derive answers at the click of a button at any time at all.

The risk of getting trash or dishonest info, however, is rife. But if one is diligent or wise enough, one can easily filter out the good from the bad. And will a little investment, one can always pay reliable persons who can guide you to the right path, although there is no guarantee that money can buy valuable and credible info.

Like every other task, trial and error is the best teacher. You win some; you lose some. Success does not come without going through the ups and downs.
IsmaelDarley January 13, 2014 1:45 AM
I agree. As essential as formal education is in every task, experience is still the best teacher. One has to get dirty in the world in order to learn how it functions. One may learn certain bad habits along the way; but in the end, they will also prove to be ephemeral for people and systems can learn to adapt to new ways of functioning. The stock market, I believe, will evolve likewise.
Members, of group Guest, can not leave comments on this publication.
Please register on our website, it will take a few seconds.