RE:RE:Market Sure Loved The Q2 Results I would argue that yes, for every seller there is a buyer, but when the share price is plummeting on much larger than average volume, more and more sellers with a large number of shares are willing to sell at lower and lower ask prices and buyers are able to get their orders filled at lower and lower bid prices. This is not a good sign for a company.
In terms of a paper gain or loss vs. crystalizing a gain or loss, investors need to be careful to not live in denial about a stock - either one that was a mistake to invest in in the first place or one where a big upward move in the share price is likely not in the cards anytime soon. I think it's better to admit you made a mistake, minimize your losses, and invest the proceeds elsewhere, perhaps returning to the name once the restructuring / acquisition spree / other moves are almost complete and the company is headed toward better times re. profitability / sustained increases in share price.
Remember the time value of money principle: A dollar today is worth more than a dollar a year from now. If you've invested in a stock and it's dead money for one, two, or even three years or more (or worse, you're down money during that time), you also have to take into account the opportunity cost of forgoing other alternatives you could have invested in during this time that would have produced far superior returns. Not arguing this is an exact science or you need to hit the bullseye on both buy and sell decisions, but if a company is still trying to position itself in the market and spending money / bringing in and trying to assimilate other companies to achieve efficiencies / economies of scale, I think more often than not, the near future stock price performance won't be very good as the market is waiting to see the light at the end of the tunnel while, in the meantime, quarterly loss after quarterly loss is produced. The exception are high-flying start-ups or early stage companies that are getting a lot of hype, but they are bid up not based on fundamentals, but rather on the buzz they are generating in the market, like years ago when cannabis stocks took off like rockets without having demonstrated much at all just because people thought it was going to be the next big thing and wanted to "get in early". A lot of people likely made a lot of money in a very short period of time provided they sold before the mania stop, but they were just riding the wave of the initial excitement over cannabis stocks just like people made a lot of money on many dud tech stocks before that market crashed in the early 2000s. Same thing with many AI stocks now - some are even putting the letters "AI" right in the company's name, likely hoping that invesors will conclude "AI is going to be big, this company is in the AI sector - it's right in their name - so better get on board quick...". Similar to the dot come stocks in the early 2000s, there will be some winners and many more losers, and you either ride the speculative train early on, cash out, and make a very good buck very quickly, or wait until the company is on the cusp of completing the execution of their acquisition / restructuring / cost savings strategy and are ready to show the investment community they are profitable and will remain so.