🚨Markets for You🚨
1. Dalmia Bharat bought 20% in IEX 4 yrs back for 500cr. Street questioned asset allocation😵
2. In May 2021
Dalmia sold 4.5%, recovers 500cr. Street happy with unlocking💰
3. Today Dalmia has 15.5% stake value=2600cr
Skeptics 👉should have held full 20%
More from Nigel D'Souza
More from Iex
#IEX
see how demand supply zone or Turning points working simple entry close abv zone exit close below zone Ride to next levels
#AhmedabadNest #process https://t.co/MEJ2WvLHoF
see how demand supply zone or Turning points working simple entry close abv zone exit close below zone Ride to next levels
#AhmedabadNest #process https://t.co/MEJ2WvLHoF
#ValueInvesting #GrowthInvesting #momentum #Mindset #IEX https://t.co/35n8Y60GhX
— NISHSHKUMAR JAANI (@NishshkumarJaan) July 9, 2021
Running bullish ABC n close abv 404 Anchor Ft buy sl 350 on closing basis tgt 495-575#Relativestrength #outperformance #AhmedabadNest #investing #India #NISHSHKUMAR pic.twitter.com/CNr1c9PXqy
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x