<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Piqqem &#8211; wisdom of crowds meets stock market predictions &#8211; again&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.deepmarket.com/stock-market/piqqem-wisdom-of-crowds-meets-stock-market-predictions-again/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.deepmarket.com/stock-market/piqqem-wisdom-of-crowds-meets-stock-market-predictions-again/</link>
	<description>Think outside the Black Box</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 12:43:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephanie Gerson</title>
		<link>http://www.deepmarket.com/stock-market/piqqem-wisdom-of-crowds-meets-stock-market-predictions-again/comment-page-1/#comment-47759</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephanie Gerson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Jan 2009 17:42:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.deepmarket.com/?p=3492#comment-47759</guid>
		<description>thanks for writing about Piqqem on your blog!  in Piqqem&#039;s defense (yes, I do have a wee conflict of interest ;) I fear there are two misconceptions to your review.

first, I believe you&#039;re conflating crowdsourcing with crowd wisdom - all other social investing sites, like StockTwits leverage the former, but only Piqqem also leverages the latter.  specifically, Piqqem believes the crowd has more knowledge than any single individual.  instead of looking for the best individual stock picker and weighting votes based on investment ability, we look at aggregate opinion and allow everyone to vote as much as they want.  

second is assuming that Piqqem is doing no different than what the stock market already does.  the stock market is a summation of the demand and supply of stock market shares, in which few big buyers following the advice of few expert analysts completely overwhelm individual investors.  Piqqem, on the other hand, gives an equal vote to all investors - whether expert or not - therefore providing a much more accurate representation of what the crowd thinks.  besides, the stock price today is what investors think of the company today - we want to know where the stock price is going in the future.

anyways, thanks again for blogging, feel free to comment on our own blog (where we lay out the above arguments in more detail), and may the discussion continue!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>thanks for writing about Piqqem on your blog!  in Piqqem&#8217;s defense (yes, I do have a wee conflict of interest ;) I fear there are two misconceptions to your review.</p>
<p>first, I believe you&#8217;re conflating crowdsourcing with crowd wisdom &#8211; all other social investing sites, like StockTwits leverage the former, but only Piqqem also leverages the latter.  specifically, Piqqem believes the crowd has more knowledge than any single individual.  instead of looking for the best individual stock picker and weighting votes based on investment ability, we look at aggregate opinion and allow everyone to vote as much as they want.  </p>
<p>second is assuming that Piqqem is doing no different than what the stock market already does.  the stock market is a summation of the demand and supply of stock market shares, in which few big buyers following the advice of few expert analysts completely overwhelm individual investors.  Piqqem, on the other hand, gives an equal vote to all investors &#8211; whether expert or not &#8211; therefore providing a much more accurate representation of what the crowd thinks.  besides, the stock price today is what investors think of the company today &#8211; we want to know where the stock price is going in the future.</p>
<p>anyways, thanks again for blogging, feel free to comment on our own blog (where we lay out the above arguments in more detail), and may the discussion continue!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

