99%當沖都賠錢？從ETF到瑪莎拉蒂，他如何透過「長期買進」在指數的道路上躺著耍廢就能賺？Ft. 周冠男【哈佛商業評論✕人物面對面】S2Ep.13

我常常講台灣的散戶最麻煩的是什麼，就是不承認自己是散戶，最大的問題。所以你認知到自己的決策是有盲點、有偏誤的，你才能夠去改善它。

各位聽眾大家好，我是節目主持人楊瑪麗，歡迎來到今天的哈佛人物面對面單元。那麼事實上，我們每天的生活跟每天的工作，充斥了無數個決策。從你早餐要吃什麼開始，我們一起床了就要面對大大小小的決策。所以，我這個開場也就知道，我們今天要談的主題就是如何做對你的決策。

那麼事實上，哈佛商業評論的很多的文章，都在探討如何做對管理的決策也好，或生活的決策也好。還有我經常在節目中推薦給各位的，哈佛商業評論所主辦的個案教學領導者學程，其實最終的目的也是要訓練所有的學員，如何在精進他的決策的過程，可以增進他決策的勝率。所以提高決策勝率是我們非常強調的。

所以今天我們就邀請一個貴賓，來談談事實上我們的 podcast 比較少談投資的決策。那今天我們要特別，因為我也是有一本暢銷書，各位看螢幕聚焦過來，有一本暢銷書叫《長期買進》。在書市這麼冷清的這個時代底下，這本書的銷量已經好幾萬冊，然後持續長銷。所以我是受這本書的啟發，就決定說我們可以有一集節目，來談談投資的決策。

因為現代人來講，投資這件事情是很關鍵的。每個人都在想我應該要怎麼樣在工作以外，可以創造被動的收入，所以就可以提早財務自由，或許可以提早退休，或者是有很多想做的事，就是沒有錢就萬萬不能。所以只是說，我們要做投資的時候，到底我是要投資房地產，還是投資股票，還是投資現在很盛行的 ETF，還是我投資債券，投資黃金？選擇那麼的多，到底我們要做哪一樣的投資的標的，以及我們是要分散投資，還是集中投資？所以關於投資，就也是一個蠻重要的，現代人生活中很重要的一個顯學。

今天我照例，先從介紹一篇哈佛的文章，給各位讀者做參考開始。那我今天要推薦的一篇文章，是哈佛商業評論上，有一篇的標題叫決策精進之道。那這一篇文章蠻長的，但是如果你喜歡研究，這個有關於決策的理論，在過去一百年來，到底不同的學者，提出哪些不同的觀點的話，那這一篇文章有相當好的整理。

其中我們比較熟悉的，就是臺灣有一本暢銷書，事實上它是一個全球的暢銷書，叫做快思慢想。其實它就是一個在決策的理論，在學術的發展上，一個非常重要的里程碑。那所以如果各位有興趣的話，可以到我們的說明欄，點擊這一篇文章，去了解決策這件事情，在過去將近一百年來，不同的學者有提出，什麼樣不同的見解。

那我簡單來講，這個決策精進之道，它就特別提到說，其實一般人的決策，可以分成三種派別，三種方式。第一種叫決策分析，它就是比較有，比如數據支撐的，有學理支撐的，那比較理性的。就你有這些基礎事實，或數據基礎之後，你才來做分析，然後做決策。但是絕大多數的人的決策，比較難做到這樣。但是當然有一些公司，或者是一些金融，或一些比較科技比較嚴謹的，他可能還是很依賴決策的分析，有這樣的工具跟過程。

那麼第二種是捷思與偏誤。就是捷思也就是我們在想的，經驗很快的。我碰到什麼事情，我很快就有反應，那是因為我過去累積的經驗。但是這樣的過程，其實常常也產生很多偏誤，所以叫捷思與偏誤，就是我們可能有一些誤區。所以待會我要請教今天的貴賓，可能這一塊，也是蠻重要的一個重點。

那麼第三就是仰賴我們的直覺。碰到什麼事情，第一個直覺反應是什麼？所以我們一般人日常的決策，或者是在工作上的決策，不分這三種類型。

那這篇文章到最後也是強調說，其實我們不能只用一種方式，來做決策。尤其是一家公司，或者是在比較嚴謹的決策，可能三種你都要想一想，綜合的使用，才比較有辦法提高我們的決策勝率。所以這篇文章還是很長，如果你有興趣可以讀，而且也蠻有趣的。但是我簡短的，很短的幾分鐘，講重點給各位聽眾來參考。

那麼我們今天的重點，當然就是我們人物面對面的貴賓。我們今天特別邀請我們這一本，剛剛我所介紹這一本暢銷書的作者，周冠男周教授。他是政大商學院的副院長，也是財務管理系的特聘教授。周冠男周老師，我先請周教授跟聽眾打個招呼。

各位聽眾大家好，楊社長好，謝謝邀請。因為我也是政大EMBA畢業的，所以周老師也是我的老師。所以我在學校，我讀的時候太早了，所以還沒有機會上到你的課。如果有機會上到你長期買進的課，可能就是學費早就賺回來。

好，那我今天的周老師，事實上也是，我稍微介紹一下周教授的背景。反正他除了是在大學，就是任教做財經財務管理相關科系之外，事實上他會出這一本書，也是被我們的編輯挖掘了。就是說他在二十幾年前開始，就投資ETF，長線投資，然後投資的期間很長。那麼去年，因為現在已經2024年年底，事實上是將近兩年前，就是2023年的年初，老師應該是在媒體上接受採訪。這個故事就要從老師買了一部瑪莎拉蒂跑車說起。

然後這一台跑車的車牌號碼叫0050。有在做投資的就知道，0050，這是台灣一個很重要的，台灣第一檔 ETF 的基金，就是原大發行的0050。因為他從0050，讓他的致富，可以這樣講，就是報酬率很高，所以他才有本錢，可以去買一台。因為大學教授，大家認為也不是那種科技業金光閃閃，大學教授收入是，也是不錯，但是沒有那麼金光閃閃。所以買了瑪莎拉蒂，這個故事就流傳起來了。然後大家就開始研究，老師的投資的一些方法。

所以我們今天就要跟老師來聊聊，你的投資的決策，是不是也可以用到日常企業經營管理的決策。

那我們先從第一個問題，來請教老師，你的瑪莎拉蒂故事，要不要跟聽眾再講一遍？也可能很多人沒聽過。

其實我書裡面有寫。因為這2023年初，我前面一部車開了16年，我要換車。可是他車子也沒壞，找不到理由。那只是想說，人生到這個階段，給自己一些獎賞。那就帶兒子去，其實是全家去。但是我兒子他很喜歡車子，小男生。那一開始我是鎖定其他德國品牌的車，他就不感興趣，一點興趣都沒有。那個就是比較傳統，一板一眼的。他就說要去看瑪莎拉蒂。那就去嘛，去了之後整個眼睛是亮的，這個也要碰一碰，那個也要碰一碰。那種三千萬等一下摸一下。我說不要亂碰，碰壞了賠不起。

後來賺了一圈回來，因為德國車的，我要的那個品牌，他很受歡迎，他訂車大概要半年才會到，而且他改款價格也不確定。但是價格多少你都是要買單，因為他太受歡迎。結果又轉回瑪莎拉蒂展場，就有現車，還可以有延長保固。那其實我當然都推給我兒子，說他喜歡。但是我自己也覺得還不錯。我想說人生到這個年紀，真的最多再開兩部車，開到75歲，差不多在這一步在下一步，差不多到那個年齡。我覺得說，那換一部比較小眾的，也是試試看，然後喜歡的，對喜歡的。

那業代就說，那你車牌要選什麼？因為一般買那種車的人，會想要自己挑車牌。結果就靈機一動，因為我長期投資指數型ETF，報酬率不錯。我說那就幫我挑0050。結果想不到起標價3000，一直到結標都沒有人跟我競標，因為沒有人知道那個代碼是什麼意思。對，然後後來我在那個台北火車站停車的時候，停到一個車位叫056，是元大的高股息ETF。0050跟056就這麼巧。所以我就照一張相，傳給我在元大工作的高層，我一個大學同學，他是元大的高階管理的。他就說你這個太經典了。我只是要跟他講，跟他半開玩笑，你看我多麼支持元大，你看我連買車，馬上都叫0050，然後停也停在056。你看就這麼巧。他說你這個太經典了。然後後來就他們有公司的投顧，就來訪問我。那應該是我第一次上媒體，從此以後就引起一些關注。

我必須澄清一件事情，很多人說，這個是把0050賣掉的，一夜致富的故事。這兩種講法都是錯的。第一個，我並沒有賣掉。因為利率很低，我其實是用貸款的。因為報酬率很好，我幹嘛把它賣掉？我覺得長期報酬是好的，所以我用貸款，貸款現在很便宜。第二個，這不是一夜致富，我也沒致富，也不是一夜。應該是說，長期投資讓我這個底氣，可以做這件事。

但是大家其實想一想，買那個車是不理性的。我一直叫人家要理性，你買國產車其實都是不理性的。因為根據財務計算，你每次坐計程車，比買車還划算。你買車都是不理性的。對，買這個車都是不理性的。那何況是買到進口跑車，那更不理性。

那我們待會會談，我覺得人不一定要完全理性，就像你講的，偶爾有一些偏誤捷思。這人之所以為人，就是有情感。但是在財務決策上面，尤其是年輕人，我覺得絕對一開始要理性。等到你我這個年紀，有一些累積之後，你做一些不理性，或相對有些理性的行為，我覺得是可以的。因為人生不用那麼辛苦，對不對？年輕的時候拼了忍了，那現在就可以稍微放鬆。所以整個故事大概就這樣。那就引起一些討論，我覺得蠻有趣的，誤打誤撞做了一個社會實驗。因為人家說，我常常講數據跟統計分析，很難說服人。但是大家都喜歡聽故事。所以很多人聽到我的故事，就願意聽我講話。我覺得這是好事。

所以是他這個，元大就安排人來採訪你？對，就是我去他們的那個，因為他們固定有一個節目，都會一開始訪問像投資專家，或者說他們自己的經營經理人。那有一集就訪問我，那一集忽然開始流量就很大。所以老師瞬間變名人。你是不是沒有一夕致富，也是一夕成名？對。但是我覺得我講的東西，但是因為Maserati 0050是故事，所以大家就聽得進去。

對，老師，那我冒昧請教你，那台車到底多少錢買的？那台車，它的那個價格帶很寬，從300多到800多都有，大概就是這個範圍。這個中間點。對，沒有上千萬，沒有。你買的沒有上千萬，因為它是個休旅車，所以不到千萬，跑車才要到千萬。對啊。所以並沒有把cash out，並沒有把你的0050賣掉，然後來買這台車，而是去貸款。因為0050的報酬可以有，一年大概9%點多。從掛牌到現在。因為現在貸款利率，你看教授就是薪水不高，薪水不高，薪用很好。所以1點多嗎？對，我們貸款利率2點多，超低的。薪用貸款。所以把錢，我何必把它賣掉，然後去買車？我覺得貸款就好啦。這個就是我們講的槓桿，對不對？全世界哪一家上市公司，沒有開槓桿？是。所以我覺得欠錢不是壞事。欠錢要欠在你能力範圍之內，其實是可以的。

事實上這一本書裡頭有提到說，你開始投資0050，到現在大概20年左右？對，20多年。對，然後的整體報酬是550%？550是去年。去年。算一整年。今年已經600多了。就是從頭到尾，就是累積20年是550。去年就是他們掛牌20年，今年已經到600多了，因為今年又漲了一波了。是。所以這是單比的？這個是單比。但是如果你持續投入，不會那麼高，因為要有平均，它會平均掉。理解。

所以老師現在看，你會不會還是會持續買進？因為現在已經相對高點了，那你還是持續買進？我講幾個概念。第一個講就是，今天的⾼點就是未來的低點。台股前一波⾼點撐了20幾年，叫12682。民國70幾年我在念大學，狂飆到12682，摔到2000多點。結果20年沒有突破，終於在兩年前突破了。很多人就不敢買了，現在都22000點，23000點了。所以 I always tell everyone, the market is always going up, but there will be big fluctuations in between. So if you have this belief, any time is a good time to enter. So in the long run, it is always the low point. The overall long term is upward. So today's high point will be the low point in twenty to thirty years.

And everyone should know, our index does not include dividends. So every time there is a dividend distribution, it will fall. But if you add back the dividends, the current return rate, now it is already over 50,000 points. You can check the Taiwan Stock Exchange website. There is a Taiwan Weighted Return Index. It is not the weighted index, it is the return index. It adds back all the dividends. The current book value is 22,000, 23,000. But in fact, if you add back the dividends, it is already over 50,000. So our normal situation is over 50,000 if dividends are included. If dividends are included, and compound interest is calculated, it is over 50,000 points. So many people will say it's a high point, I don't want to chase the high, don't chase the high. But in the long run, it is always the low point.

對啊，老師，那我們再來談一下，就是從那個0050 Maserati的車之後，為什麼後來有這一本書？

我其實也很意外。因為就是天下文化的編輯，有一天忽然就寫了個email給我。我猜他應該是有在網路搜尋，或者問過一些念政大、EMBA學長姐。那我其實長期在我的臉書上面，都分享一些長期投資觀念嘛。那我也沒有什麼特別目的，因為我過去二、三十年，我覺得這個方式對我來講是很有收穫的。那我希望更多人知道，所以就越來越多人知道我、追蹤我。那可能他從一些管道聽到我，就請來邀請我。

所以老師的臉書社群有多少人？現在兩萬七、兩萬八了，算很高。那他找我其實我猶豫了很久。因為我其實從來沒有想過要寫書，因為我覺得對我來講是非常耗時間的一件事，因為已經很忙了，學校工作很忙。而且我不覺得我是一個很好的寫手吧，就是說我不覺得我的文筆很優雅或怎麼樣，我只是平鋪直敘嘛，就是講清楚就對了。所以有點意外。那時候剛好因為我有一個學術休假，那一年我在教授休假？一年還是半年？對，就一整年。就這麼巧，我休假的第一天，兩家出版社同時寫email給我，請我看能不能考慮出書。然後後來我就跟天下談，謝謝選擇天下文化，因為天下畢竟是第一品牌。我覺得他們就是在各方面我還是比較放心。那也很多我們政大EMBA學長節都是天下同仁嘛。我就跟天下簽約。我還記得很清楚是8月8號父親節那一天，就想了大概一個禮拜我就簽約了。簽約之後，簽約8月8號？簽約是8月8號。8月1號寫mail給我，然後約8月2號3號談，然後8月8號我就簽約了。所以後來我回想起來，其實是無心插柳柳成蔭吧。

那我因為我這個人做事是這樣的，我不喜歡拖。所以合約雖然寫八個月，但我六個月其實就寫完了。我大概二月初就寫完。所以那半年其實我花了很多時間。因為我們學者寫書都是有憑有據的。因為我們的訓練的關係，你寫學術論文沒有引用別人的文章，或者沒有自己算馬上就被退稿。所以各位如果買我這本書回去看，你會發覺我都附註一大堆，把科普書當論文在寫。因為寫每一句話我覺得都是有憑有據的，我不會空口說白話。所以這樣的結果也可能會讓大家覺得，它裡面內容是比較可信的吧。

那老師從一開始有點抗拒，我沒有寫過書，或者是文筆是比較樸實的，後來會想要出，打動你的原因是什麼？

因為就是天下文化編輯，總編輯跟編輯都非常的誠懇。其實就是緊迫盯人，一直希望我能寫。我想說人生嘛。後來轉念一想，我能夠接觸到的人其實畢竟是少的，因為我們的管道不夠廣，我在畢竟在學界。那你說連臉書知道的也是有限。那我才想說，寫一本書留下一個紀錄，然後透過這個管道，看能不能讓更多人知道我的想法。大概是這樣，所以我才決定好，那來試試看。

也跟各位聽眾分享，這一本書一共有老師的副標叫做投資的42堂課，而且還有一個副註叫自制力，自制力投資課。這應該都很有學問的。為什麼是42堂課？為什麼老師這麼強調自制？自己要克制自己的自制力？老師要不要講一下？

當初為什麼是設計42堂課？其實我是從行為財務學，應該講從傳統財務學理論開始，就理性的理論，然後再來是行為，就您剛剛講的偏差。其實就剛剛您分享的那本書，對理性的策略分析，偏差跟那個跟直覺，捷思與偏誤，經驗嘛。我大概也是朝這三個方向寫。那寫完之後，其實42堂課因為剛好是42個段落，就42個idea。那有些不盡完全相關，所以後來我們就決定說，你其實可以42堂課，挑你有興趣的上，前後不一定有連貫，都沒有關係。

所以這本書的書名，本來是要取名叫做自制力投資課。那因為自制力太學術了，編輯覺得可能大家會聽不懂。那自制力是我全書，非常強調的一個概念。因為我們從學術研究發現，人都是缺乏自制力的，尤其在投資的時候，常常會高不敢進，低也不敢進。那所以用一個決策來講，譬如說，吃飯之後，我問你要吃甜點還是吃水果？那大部分人都會想說，我先吃甜點蛋糕，下一餐再吃水果。結果下一餐又來了，是不是同樣的邏輯又出現？他想說那我先吃甜點跟蛋糕，然後下一餐再吃水果。結果一輩子都在吃甜點蛋糕，從來沒有吃到水果。

所以我裡面講了很多人的行為偏誤，尤其是面對金錢的時候，缺乏自制力。那你要有一些自制力的工具，來把你的手腳綁住。譬如說常常講定期定額，甚至我覺得年輕人應該都要買房子，因為房貸就是約束你消費一個很重要的自制力的工具。對不對？因為你說房子很貴了，沒有問題，我也覺得也很貴了。但是過去的經驗來說，台灣房子很少跌，頂多是不會漲。那我覺得它大跌的機率，我個人判斷其實很低。那但是如果你不買房子，你錢很容易就花掉。對吧？很多年輕的夫妻說，我一年要背幾十萬的房貸，那我一年兩個人出去玩一趟，不是很開心嗎？結果過了幾十年之後，你什麼都沒有積累。我覺得這樣是很可惜的。

所以老師就發現說，我們在做投資，一般人就是自制力是偏差的。那這一本書還有一共42個觀念，其中你覺得比較打動讀者的是什麼樣的觀念？

我覺得應該是長期投資的複利效果這件事情，是一般人比較沒有去意識到的。因為市面上，大部分的投資的書，都是鼓勵你短線操作。所以我常常講，這也是自制力的問題。大家都想要在股市一夜致富，但是沒有人想要在股市慢慢變有錢。因為遙遠的未來是很模糊的概念，但是現下的滿足是馬上有感受的。所以這樣就造成說， I tell you investing needs to last for twenty to thirty years, you can't listen. You want to make a limit up tomorrow, preferably five consecutive days to earn 50%. You will have no regrets in your life. No, you will go back and lose all 50%. Because short-term trading is inherently difficult to control. You won't say you'll run when you make money. No, you will definitely go back. But long-term investment is what I just talked about with you. The market fluctuates greatly in the short term, but it will always go up in the long term. And the effect of compound interest is terrible.

Let me give an example. If you don't understand compound interest very well mathematically, I'll give you a simple calculation method called the Rule of 72. The Rule of 72 is to take 72 as the numerator and the annual rate of return as the denominator. So 72, for example, the Taiwan stock market is about 9-plus. Let's take 9, a bit conservative. 72 divided by 9, that's 8. The number 8 means that the money you invest will double every 8 years. It will double in 8 years. So this effect is very strong. And think about it, young people from 25 years old, after graduating with a master's degree, start working until they are 65 years old, a total of 40 years. If you initially invest 10,000 yuan, 40 years divided by 8 is 5 doublings. 2 to the power of 5 is 32. So every 10,000 yuan will become 320,000 yuan. Of course, this is if you invest for 40 years. No one has that much principal at the beginning. But if you invest regularly, the compound interest effect is also good.

Let me give you another statistic. Let's start with 3,000 yuan for young people. And assume an annual rate of return of 9%. If you invest 3,000 yuan continuously for 40 years, that's 480 months. If you calculate the simple principal, it's about 3,000 yuan multiplied by 480 months, which is only an investment of 1.5 million yuan. But it will become how much money? After 40 years, it will become 10 million yuan, with an extra 8.5 million yuan. Many people will tell me, Teacher Zhou, what you said seems right, but it seems wrong. Because 3,000 yuan for 40 years becomes 10 million yuan. But 10 million yuan in Taipei, maybe you can't even buy a toilet. Right? I said, no, you misunderstand my meaning. If you invest 3,000 yuan at age 25, and you are still investing 3,000 yuan at age 50, it means your income is really poor. But you haven't made any progress. Right, you haven't made any progress. You should increase it. So it will definitely not be only 10 million yuan. If you increase your monthly investment as you get older, you might even have 50 to 60 million yuan in the end.

So, Teacher, this is 3,000 yuan per month, 3,000 yuan. The example might be that when income is high, it becomes 10,000, and then it increases. Don't take it out at all. At age 65, then withdraw it. It might become 50 to 60 million yuan. The calculation I just did is easy. Let's assume that by age 60, you should be able to invest 30,000 yuan per month. Let's assume starting from 3,000 yuan to 30,000 yuan. The average would be about 15,000 to 16,000 yuan. Right? That's the average of the two divided by two. So let's calculate it as 14,000 yuan. If it was 3,000 yuan before, and now it's 14,000 yuan, that's five times. So 10 million yuan becomes 50 million yuan. This is the concept I just mentioned. So the earlier you invest and the more you invest, the better the effect. 3,000 yuan is really very little. Young people say I have over 30,000, and I still have to support my parents, and I have to eat and live. Who among young people today supports their parents? No. Don't be supported by your parents. Most of them support restaurants and KTV more. And travel. Right? 5,000 yuan is spent in one night. And 30,000 yuan is spent. And you tell me you don't have money to invest. I really don't believe it. I always tell young children, go back and look at your closet. How many clothes, shoes, and bags have you used only once or twice and then never again? There must be a lot of them. This is also a result of lack of self-control. This is also a part of self-control, consumption without self-control.

Everyone in our audience, our colleagues, are all smiling, thinking, am I like this? Hurry back and check. So, if you are very young and hear this, it is good news. No matter what your income is now, you should be able to squeeze out 3,000 yuan to buy a regular investment fund and just leave it there. This will force you to save. At least start with 3,000 yuan.

Let me also mention, there is a very interesting author of a book in Japan. He advocates a simple life. He has two pairs of shoes, two pairs of clothes, and two jackets. He wears them alternately every day. No one noticed that he only has two pairs. Everyone thinks others will notice. No one is paying attention to you. It's all in your own mind. So a closet full of clothes that you have to wear differently every day, no one cares.

So Teacher is teaching everyone that only with self-controlled consumption can there be self-controlled investment, right? Teacher, you started this concept of ETF funds not in Taiwan, right? You studied for your doctorate in the United States. Since you majored in finance, did you have this concept of long-term investment early on? Your book is called "Long-Term Buying," so you have this concept?

Actually, I'll tell you, at first I didn't believe this theory either. Because we studied in the United States, some stock analysis, stock valuation. After finishing, I felt very capable. But at the same time, teachers also taught about diversification and long-term buying. So we wanted to test our analytical skills. So I bought many individual stocks. I did step on landmines. And there are also stocks that are still held with returns of twenty to thirty times. But later I found that individual stocks are really very risky and difficult to analyze. As an amateur investor, it is difficult to achieve good returns by analyzing individual stocks. So after struggling in the stock market for about one or two years before my doctoral studies, I didn't make much money and stepped on landmines and went bankrupt many times. I thought, why work so hard? Then I remembered what was taught in class, and our teachers always recommended some popular science books on long-term investment. It has been repeatedly proven by statistics that long-term buying is a good strategy. So around the later stage of my doctoral studies, I turned to market-based ETFs in the United States, such as SPY, BO, etc., S&P 500 index ETFs. And I still hold them to this day. It's just that recently my children went to study in the United States, so I disposed of some of them. My logic is always like this: if I have money, I buy it. If I need money and don't have cash, I sell it. Don't worry about high or low points, because that's hindsight. If you don't need money, why not borrow? Because interest rates are so low now. But actually, I'll tell you, I've borrowed almost to the limit. I've borrowed as much as I can within my capacity. And we don't have credit in the United States, so you can't borrow money in the United States. So if you want US dollars, you can only sell ETFs.

A while ago, the media reported. I was interviewed at a certain event. I said I also sold 0050. Everyone was very surprised. Didn't you say you wouldn't sell? I said, I didn't say buy, buy, buy, don't sell. My selling situation is, you must, that is, if you need money, you can sell it. So why did I sell? It's very simple, because I bought a new house, a pre-sale house. It requires down payments, second payments, third payments. Who has that much cash? Of course, I disposed of it because I had already borrowed all my personal loans to the limit. I couldn't borrow any more. And the house hasn't been transferred yet, so I can't use the house as collateral. So I had to sell my ETFs to pay those down payments and second payments. So my logic is always the same: if I need money and can't borrow, then I sell it.

In fact, I specifically flipped through Teacher's book and specifically organized Teacher's. We have already talked about the concept of self-control issues or long-term investment that many people lack. In fact, your book mentions ten behavioral biases. When we make investment decisions or engage in investment behavior, there are ten behavioral biases. So Teacher, can you mention one or two of the more classic ones?

One is called overconfidence. People are full of overconfidence. Otherwise, you can't live every day. You can't feel that you are very bad. How do you live every day? Having confidence is not bad, but what's scary is overconfidence. In academia, there are many experiments. Let me give a classic example: When I ask the subjects, do you think your driving skills are better than the average person? About 80% to 90% of people will think their driving skills are better than the average person. Better than the average person. This, of course, violates statistical results. Because statistics tell us that being better than the average person is only half. Right, right. So at least 30% to 40% are overconfident. This is also interesting. If you ask MBA students, do you think you are better than your classmates? 95% of them think they are better than their peers. 95! So it's usually 80% to 90%. In investing, what problems does this cause in decision-making? For example, President, I have a share of TSMC, and I sell it to you. I must think TSMC will fall, otherwise why would I sell it to you? And you must think TSMC will rise. So, but we have completed the transaction. So after the transaction, TSMC will either rise or fall the next day. But at the time of the transaction, didn't we both think we were right? So overconfidence causes a phenomenon: excessive trading volume. Let me give you a number. The turnover volume in the United States as the numerator, and the market capitalization as the denominator. That is, for every 100 yuan of market capitalization, how much is traded every year? The United States is 97. For every 100 yuan, 97 yuan is traded. Isn't that terrible? Terrible. What is Taiwan's? Do you know? Taiwan is 300. My God. For every 100 yuan, 300 yuan is traded. The reason is simple: retail investors are overconfident. The United States is a market dominated by institutions, so the trading volume is relatively low. Taiwan is a market dominated by retail investors. So because retail investors are full of overconfidence, they have excessive trading volume. Excessive trading volume is detrimental to wealth accumulation. Because just the handling fees and taxes will erode a large portion of the returns. Yes, let's simply calculate it. If you turn over 50 times a year, let's just turn over once a week. For many short-term investors, once a week is already very long. Right? So once a week. The handling fee is now 1.425 per thousand. Let's cut it in half, because many brokers can offer discounts. Let's calculate it as 1.5 per thousand. Transaction tax is 3 per thousand. Sell at 3 per thousand. Buy at 1.5 per thousand. So 1.5 per thousand plus 3 per thousand is 4.5 per thousand. 4.5 per thousand multiplied by 50 is 22.5%. That is to say, if you don't earn anything all year, just running around, once a week. You pay the government and the brokers 22.5%. If I stay put, the market is 9%. So you need at least 31.5% return to be the same as me. Do you think this is easy? I think this is extremely difficult. You need to earn 31.5% a year to be the same as the market average. So many people because of overconfidence. And because the handling fees are paid little by little each time, they don't feel it. They won't calculate the accumulated amount like I do.

Let me tell you another thing. People only remember what they want to remember. So they only remember the times they made money, and they forget the times they lost money. So people get confused about whether they are making money or not. But I'll tell you, academic research has found that using Taiwan's data, not foreign data, that 99% of day traders lose money. The reason is simple, as I just calculated for you, because the handling fees and taxes are too high. Yes, this is the consequence of overconfidence.

Teacher, this investment decision, or the overconfidence you just mentioned, is it also reflected in corporate management? For example, many companies, if it's the end of the year, they do employee performance reviews. Maybe 80% to 90% of employees feel good about themselves. I have made great contributions to the company. My performance is excellent. I can talk about the negative impact of overconfidence on corporate management. Most CEOs are overconfident. Because their successful experiences give them a lot of confidence. Academic research has found that overconfident managers are prone to initiating mergers and acquisitions. They are always trying to acquire others. And the market knows that these people are overconfident. So when an overconfident manager announces a merger and acquisition, the company's stock price falls more severely. This has been found by academic research, and the effect of mergers and acquisitions is worse. Because they just love to initiate mergers and acquisitions, they want everything. But the results are not good. And when evaluating, they overestimate their own management capabilities, resulting in a reduction in company and shareholder value. So, investment decisions, the behavior reflected in people's investments, are the same in other fields. When it comes to mergers and acquisitions, you just mentioned, I am more focused on the individual investment behavior aspect. But behavioral finance is divided into two parts: behavioral investment and behavioral corporate finance. So what I just told you is behavioral corporate finance. Yes, it talks about the decision-maker, how overconfidence leads to consequences for the company. They are all very similar. The mistakes individuals make are also similar to the mistakes corporate managers make. They are all human, so they make similar mistakes. So you will make similar mistakes in investment decisions and corporate decisions.

We don't need to finish all of them. Let's talk about another one that you think is more common. I think anchoring is another one. Anchoring. You asked a question at the beginning when we were chatting. You asked, it's so high now, can I still enter? Right? The current high point is over 22,000. This is an anchor. So you see 22,000, 23,000, and you think it's so high compared to before. Right? Because the previous high point was 12,682. The Taiwan stock market in the 1980s soared to 12,682 and then fell to over 2,000. Because the Taiwan stock market was soaring too much then. So 12,682 was broken through about two years ago. So people started to guess that it would be corrected. But it didn't. It continued to rise to over 20,000 points. So at that time, if you were afraid to enter at 12,682, wouldn't you have missed out on over 10,000 points now? So I always say, this is all anchoring. Because today's high point will be the low point of the future. And you are afraid to invest because you see a historical high point. It will definitely be broken through in the future. Today's high point will definitely be broken through. So why do you say it's so high now? Because you are looking at the past. But I ask everyone, should you look at the future or the past when investing in stocks? You should look at the future. So as long as you believe that human economy will continue to grow, then future returns will continue to rise. Will there be corrections? Maybe. It's possible. But the correction is only temporary. It will always come back. Anchoring affects many, many things, even everyday decisions. Let me give an example. I like drinking red wine very much. So in class, I asked my students a question. I said, now you go to a restaurant, and the wine list has three wines. You are entertaining clients, and the company is paying. There are three wines: 35,000, 5,000, and 500. Which one would you choose? 35,000 and 500. Most people would choose 5,000. Because 35,000 is too expensive. 500 is too cheap. Maybe the business deal won't go through. The client will think, why is he treating me to such cheap wine? So they choose 5,000. Then I change the wine list: 5,000, 2,000, and 500. At this time, many people choose 2,000. Because below 5,000, 2,000 looks more reasonable. Because I'll tell you, the 5,000 yuan wine is expensive. So this is anchoring. The 30,000 yuan is placed there to anchor you. In fact, many times restaurants don't intend to sell you that 30,000 yuan wine. They want to sell you that 5,000 yuan wine. So this anchoring effect is that if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this time, anchoring will cause the effect that you will use past prices to determine future investments. This is all wrong. So investing should always look to the future. For example, if a stock rises from 400 to 600, no one dares to buy it. But if it falls from 800 to 600, won't many people rush to buy it? But it's all 600. So your anchor is different. Above and below, doesn't it feel expensive and cheap completely differently? So how should we make decisions? At this