Piqqem’s been getting press in some pretty hotshot publications lately, like Techcrunch and MarketWatch. But with press have come the same ol’ misconceptions about the app. So we thought it worthwhile to dedicate a post to addressing these misconceptions, not only for purposes of clarity, but to arm you – members of the crowd – with what you’ll need to engage in informed debate about Piqqem specifically, and the wisdom of crowds in general. We’re kinda tired of copying and pasting the same arguments in comments to blog posts, so we’re equipping you to develop your own! And we’re gonna quote from those blog posts to do so.
Misconception #1: The market already expresses crowd sentiment "I think a community-based system where people vote on the likely future price of stocks already exists: It's called the stock market" ( in response to MarketWatch article). Come on, yalls. Do you really think such fine minds would invest in a poor re-creation of the stock market? The stock market is a summation of the demand and supply of stock market shares, in which few big buyers following the advice of few expert analysts completely overwhelm individual investors. Au contraire, Piqqem gives an equal vote to all investors – whether expert or not – therefore providing a much more accurate representation of what the crowd thinks. Besides, the stock price today is what investors think of the company today – we want to know where the stock price is going in the future.
Misconception #2: Piqqem ain’t no different than all those other social investing sites "So, some well known brains from MSFT and AAPL (a co-founder of AAPL and a Microsoft exec) have come up with a site that uses collective knowledge to rank stocks - the wisdom of crowds. Hmm, why does that sound familiar?" (TMFSarahGen’s CAPS Blog, implying that Piqqem is the same as social investing site Motley Fool CAPS). It might sound familiar, but don’t be fooled (heh). Piqqem differs from other sites in that we believe the crowd has more knowledge than any single individual. Instead of looking for the best individual stock picker and weighting votes based on investment ability, which is what CAPS and other social investing sites do, we look at aggregate opinion and allow everyone to vote as much as they want. This orientation towards crowd wisdom manifests itself in our crowd indicators, such as top rated stocks, most active stocks, stocks with most rising sentiment, and stocks with most falling sentiment.
Misconception #3+: General misconceptions about the wisdom of crowds (hence 3+) "So the site looks ok, but I was turned off already. Why was I turned off you might ask? Because I can't find out the rating for a stock, unless I rate it myself!" (TMFSarahGen’s CAPS Blog). Ironic that this is what turned her off, because this is precisely what sets Piqqem apart from CAPS and other social investing sites! See Misconception #2 for a refresher on that misconception.) Users cant find out the ratings for stocks before voting to maintain independence, which is one of the four elements required for crowd wisdom to emerge. "Hmmm, imagine that I am a biotech investing neophyte or idiot (either word would possibly describe my ability to pick biotechs), and then imagine that if I want to see what the crowd has determined - that I must vote first! You don't want my vote on a biotech, believe me you don't!" (TMFSarahGen’s CAPS Blog). Listen naysayers, you can’t have your cake and eat it too. First you say Piqqem is the same as the stock market, and then you react to the fact that everyone gets an equal vote (which makes it different than the stock market). This is because Piqqem, unlike other social investing sites (here we go again…), is a true wisdom of crowds application. This means it gives an equal vote to everyone – yes, everyone – including the neophyte/idiot, because amateurs are just as important as the experts in maintaining diversity, which is another of the four elements required for crowd wisdom. (Bratty side-note: I made the above comments on TMFSarahGen’s post, and although other commenters agreed, she didn’t even respond!) If any of the above doesn't make sense, I recommend reading about the wisdom of crowds in James Surowiecki’s book of that same title. Besides being an awesome book, Piqqem will make more sense.
Misconception #4: Piqqem should be used as a stand-alone source of stock information "I find such a concept intriguing but I wouldn’t necessarily base investment decisions on this site" (ANithian in response to Techcrunch post). We’re not suggesting that Piqqem is a silver bullet, but that it’s a source of stock information, to be used in conjunction with other sources – such as expert analysis, the market, and yes, even social investing sites. Within this portfolio of different sources, Piqqem is an entirely different organism, because it leverages the wisdom of crowds, which is what makes it valuable.
Misconception #5: Applying the wisdom of crowds to stock predicting won’t work "…when dealing with financial instruments and the regulations, I don’t think crowdsourcing will last in the stock market realm…" (FinancePuzzle in response to Lazy Man and the Money post). Right now, there’s a lot of experimentation going on with applying the wisdom of crowds (blog post about that forthcoming). As far as we know, whether or not the crowd can successfully predict stock movements is still an open question. Which means, open to debate. And we’d Love to hear your thoughts in the comments. But the only way we’ll find out is if we try it. Hence, join the crowd!
There are other responses to misconceptions hanging out in our FAQ, so I’ll leave it hear for now. But if you've found other misconceptions and/or defended Piqqem chivalrously, share it with the crowd by commenting here or posting on our Facebook wall!
Comments