- Joined
- 5 July 2005
- Posts
- 536
- Reactions
- 1
Can you run that by me againtech/a said:Hmm say you have a $10,000 account your bet each week.
Over 52 weeks thats $520k.
4% of turnover for a year is $20,800 or over a 200% loss on initial capital.
Perspective---
I stopped betting on horses after two years because my stats showed a loss in the vicinity of 6% of turnover.
tech/a said:Hmm say you have a $10,000 account your bet each week.
Over 52 weeks thats $520k.
4% of turnover for a year is $20,800 or over a 200% loss on initial capital.
Perspective---
BSD said:Then again, some think it is claptrap and baseless assumptions - but some people didnt finish high school, let alone study statistics
Actually its quite a bit worse than traders - the bookie doesn't let you jump off for half price at the last turn if you see the nag headed for heavy going.mit said:well they are caught in the same stats that traders are. Each bet has to be small enough so that a series of losses doesn't make too big a dent in your capital.MIT
NettAssets said:Actually its quite a bit worse than traders - the bookie doesn't let you jump off for half price at the last turn if you see the nag headed for heavy going.
John
having done a bit of a random walk through various small cap stocks being discussed under the 'asf stock talk' part of these forums I reckon there are plenty of people out there that could benefit from applying a bit of fundamental analysis.
Personally I'm amazed that people would even contemplate taking a long position in a stock without at least taking a cursory look at the fundamentals, and if taking a large long position then a detailed look at the fundamentals would certainly be warranted to my mind - unless that large long position is only a small part of one's total capital and and amount that someone would feel comfortable about losing altogether.
Snake Pliskin said:I guess it depends on the time frame one wants to hold for.
Nobody (surely?) would day trade a stock that had a chance of getting delisted during that day due to solvency problems
Snake Pliskin said:An extreme case, and yes no one in their right mind would.
A day trade of Macquarie bank or BHP would require fundamental analysis?
Ok, so both of those stocks have such a high media and analyst profile that any financial cracks that could be picked up by a layman would probably have been dissected a thousand times over in the media as soon as they arose anyway.
But that aside - why not? If hypothetically BHP was trading on a PE ratio of 400 would that impact decisions about how to trade it? Surely you'd be looking for fairly significant trading returns in exchange for the risk of trading a stock so over valued?
Cuttlefish with respect to your thoughts, can you tell us a stock that has traded T/A going up on chart, that got delisted ( broke ) ?cuttlefish said:Ok, so both of those stocks have such a high media and analyst profile that any financial cracks that could be picked up by a layman would probably have been dissected a thousand times over in the media as soon as they arose anyway.
But that aside - why not? If hypothetically BHP was trading on a PE ratio of 400 would that impact decisions about how to trade it? Surely you'd be looking for fairly significant trading returns in exchange for the risk of trading a stock so over valued?
Snake Pliskin said:I`m not trying to play one upmanship, but the above refutes what you said in your first statment on the issue today.
cuttlefish said:I don't really see how? e.g. why did you raise those two particular stocks as examples? My impression was because you felt they are rock solid companies that can be safely traded without fundamental analysis. My response to that is the reason you believe they are rock solid is due to an implicit level of fundamental analysis thats out there in the public domain as a result of the high level of scrutiny they receive.
What I will concede is that I can understand that a trader trading to a system that defines entries and exits and is combining that with money management doesn't necessarily need to be looking at fundamentals when deciding to trade a stock.
As I've said in this and other threads - whether fundamental, or technical, or a combination of both; - the key is following a plan and having the discipline to stick to the plan.
I also still don't see why it has to be an either/or situation - I'm more than happy to concede that technical analysis can complement a fundamental investment strategy.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?