Realist
Billie Jean is not my lover
- Joined
- 1 June 2006
- Posts
- 2,057
- Reactions
- 3
Magdoran said:Disclaimer: These comments are not financial advice, and readers are advised to seek appropriate professional financial advice for their personal circumstances. Personal views for discussion & educational purposes only.
To follow through on this analogy, the trader also looks to buy the black shirts when they are on sale, but his goal is to sell them when they are expensive and then repeat the whole process when the next colour shirts are on sale. More effort required, but the goal of the trader is to generate extra income over and above the increased fees.Realist said:How does it make me money?
Well everyone following a trend leaves the door open for others to go against the trend and get bargains.
If everyone is buying red shirts cause that is the trend, then market forces will dictate black shirts will be on sale, I'd buy an Armani black shirt at a discount to your red shirt! You wouldn't - you'd pay too much for the red shirt and wear it till it went out of fashion. Fair enough too, most people would, but when black shirts come back into fashion, years later - I've already got one, and I paid bugger all for it. You'd rush off and buy a black shirt at a premium. My costs are lower. Your clothes bill would be higher than mine.
tech/a said:http://lightning.he.net/cgi-bin/suid/~reefcap/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=forum;f=74
Read and weep----once you play traders have a real track record you wont mind the tax and you'll be in the position to trade for real.
In the meantime your contributions are helpful in many ways.
Nice post Mag, I'm all for some transparent Gann discussion and critiques too; instead of the 'Emperor's New Clothes' type debates where 'non-believers' are condemned, I'm also glad to see you critically analyse Gann and sift through it instead of swallowing it whole. Even normal TA and EW people could just give price projections and estimates but without a clearly explained theoretical basis for it we have little clue as to what's occurring. I hope this leads to some fruitful discussion.Magdoran said:Hello Yogi,
Thanks for your comments, much appreciated.
Yogi, I was not asking you for a free lunch, nor would I expect you to ask me for one. I was merely asking you for a taste of how you trade to compare notes. I did say a clue, not your entire methodology that has taken you years to develop, I would not expect you to give your IP away for nothing..............
............
......
I have essentially invited you to open up a little to have an interesting dialogue – let’s set aside everyone trying to prove or disprove anything, and just discuss and compare notes, surely this would be much more constructive?
What do you say Yogi, are you game? Come out to play, please…
Warm Regards
Magdoran
kennas said:Keep posting Teck, appreciate ALL the comments here. Just have to wade through some dirt for the diamonds sometimes.
I don't understand the link you posted to Nick's website though. A bit of cross promotion??
sails said:Perhaps T/A vs. F/A has more to do with timeframe.
F/A is far more necessary for long term investors but not much use to the short term trader.
Day traders would be predominately using T/A with perhaps a just enough F/A to reduce the risk of being caught in a bankruptcy.
Then there are those who trade medium term who can't see what all the fuss is about and use both
Realist said:Because they contradict each other. One looks at the true value of a company, one looks at the popularity. I've never heard of a strategy to intersect them both.
RodC said:Rubbish, used properly TA and FA can complement each other, if you think they only contradict then you really have no idea.
Rod.
I still say you can't use both. Trading works, investing works, but I don't believe you can combine both to get even better results. You're only gonna get worse results.
Because they contradict each other. One looks at the true value of a company, one looks at the popularity. I've never heard of a strategy to intersect them both.
You can't have an undervalued popular company.
All you'd end up doing is buying companies that are not too overvalued and are popular, just not too popular - which seems ridiculous. You're finding the middle ground which reduces any advantage you had.
kennas said:Tech, I tried to register but my email address has been banned?? What the? I'm a nice person.Must be because it's hotmail. Oh well.
Snake Pliskin said:Popular as in stock prices or popular as in its products?
eddievanhalen said:Now......5 of the 10 stocks that meet your criteria look very good on paper with nice ratios ,strong growth etc...... , are in a strong sector and have a rising chart (which confirms their strength and potential for further gains). Good examples in recent times inclue IMD and STS.
The other 5 of your 10 stocks are the ones you may prefer.........dirt cheap ratios , nice dividend yield but little/no growth and the sector they're in is on the nose. They have poor sentiment and have just been getting cheaper and cheaper.........eg) PBB and CMI in the auto sector in recent years.
If you would honestly rather hold the 2nd group then you are doomed in terms of making superior returns in the long term IMHO.
Magdoran said:Hello Yogi,
Thanks for your comments, much appreciated.
I have essentially invited you to open up a little to have an interesting dialogue – let’s set aside everyone trying to prove or disprove anything, and just discuss and compare notes, surely this would be much more constructive?
What do you say Yogi, are you game? Come out to play, please…
Warm Regards
Magdoran
Put it this way if you think you can invest short term you are dreaming. There is only one way to invest - LONGTERM.
The stock price dictates how long you trade for, not you.
It is up 30% in the past month!
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?