The Angelina Jolie Stock Index, Decoded

Reader Comments
Back to blog

Interesting article. I work for Fisher Investments, and we have a forum-style website that discusses stock market misperceptions. Check it out here:http://www.fisherinvestmentsforum.com/stock-market-misperceptions

Fisher Investments of CA 6:40PM May 26, 2009

Interesting article about alternative stock indices. I work for Fisher Investments and more financial news and information is available at MarketMinder http://www.marketminder.com

Fisher Investments Outreach of CA 5:37AM March 24, 2009

The first thing I noticed was the box office prowess of Angelina Jolie. Wanted did a bit well, but what about her other movie? Can she pull a dud to box office success single handedly? Wanted has been the worst perfroming summer blockbuster. It perfomed well in the forst week and has only made less than 150 million in the US. Not much for a movie that had a huge first weekend. She is actually box office poison. I am sure there other celebrities you could have used. Then again, you wanted to do some PR for Angelina, didn't you. Was it worth your credibility? How convinient for you to forget st John.

Jenna of NY 2:41PM August 21, 2008

Looks like susyq has some issues. Why the bile over Jolie?
You're mistaken about St John. Where do you even get your facts from - the National Inquirer?
By the way, the Angelina Jolie Stock Index is a joke. It's not real. The ups and downs of those companies are unrelated to Angelina Jolie. Perhaps we should stop playing with the weak minds of celebrity fanatics. I realize it's amusing to toy with them but is it really fair?

Evan G. of NY 4:44PM August 20, 2008

Trevor Nielosen must be working overtime putting out these stories for Jolie . How much did you get paid to publish this disinformation. Jolie is a sinking ship. What about St: John? Ey? a bit hard to explain, Jolie SUNK their stock. She is POISON.
Trevor Nielsen is pimping Jolie out like he is a used car salesman.
Hard work but somebody have to do it since she aint selling herself, she has to be shoved down peoples throat , for them to be able to swallow her.

susyq of 9:26AM August 20, 2008

First of all, Seeking Alpha is not a reputable financial blog, it is not scientific at all, and it has a reputation as a repository for articles by promoters, pumpers, and dumpers.
But if you really want to go there, maybe you should have actually read the story:
"Gisele Bündchen's index was up 1.6%, Heidi Klum's index was down only 0.7%, and Angelina Jolie's index was down 10%, yet all were better than the Dow, which was down 10.3%."
In other words, Angelina Jolie's Index is a loser among celebrities. She was beat out SIGNIFICANTLY by Gisele and Heidi. Her difference with the Dow was not statistically significant. But given the unreliability and bias of Seeking Alpha bloggers, did she really beat out the Dow?
I just checked the facts on the Dow, and contrary to the author's assertion, it was not down 10.3%. Price as of 2/18/08: 12,348. Closing price 8/18/08 (the date of the article): 11,479. That is only a 7.0% drop. The Dow beat the Angelina Jolie Index, by a significant margin.
That is assuming the author was even being honest about the numbers for the Angelina Jolie Index. I notice he didn't include St. John's in his list of Angelina Jolie stocks.
In other words, Angelina Jolie is still a big loser.

femalefirst of 9:21AM August 20, 2008

If vultures didn't have an ecological purpose, they wouldn't exist. Being a vulture sounds worse than it is. Se article's last sentence.
EVERYBODY wants a high return at a bargain price. But, you'd better diversify. Because some things will turn out rotten, no matter how cheap.

of 12:24PM August 19, 2008