|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Bob:
The story about the learned men arguing with Columbus that the earth was
flat is just a myth. After all the ancient Greeks knew that he earth was
round, and they even made some fairly good estimates of its size. The
educated Europeans all accepted that the earth was round. Even that ancient
Kabalistic text, The Zohar, says that the earth is a ball floating in space.
The argument was that the earth was larger than Columbus thought it was. As
it turned out, Columbus, an early age hi tech government contractor, had
cost overruns because of his error.
I do like the story of the professor. Unfortunately, in every field there
is the NIH syndrome, Not Invented Here. aka as 'my minds made up, dont
confuse me with facts'
Lionel
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Wiseman <bwiseman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, August 21, 1998 1:52 PM
Subject: Re: Weekly Pick (long)
>Steve:
>
>Loved your professor story. I was a professor for 26 years and suggest
>that this prof is like most. Do you know any business/finance/economics
>profs who give any credit to technical analysis? I don't. For people
>who profess to seek true understanding about the world, they are often
>surprisingly blind to how the world actually works. Wasn't this the
>same group that fought the new round earth theory for so many decades?
>Please let us know how your prof. responds to the drops later this year.
>
>Regards,
>
>Bob Wiseman
>
>Steve Karnish wrote:
>
>> Dan,
>> I know we have discussed this on the phone, but I thought I
>> might share this with the group. The following approach has
>> returned steady profits (10%+/month) during the last 18 months.
>>
>> A. Analyze the indices and discern market direction by applying
>> the tools that you are most comfortable with and have been the
>> most reliable.
>> B. Screen for: "most volatile" issues.
>> C. Initiate positions in issues that have topping or bottoming
>> patterns that imitate the indices.
>>
>> The degree of success will be predicated on one's ability to
>> apply the proper tools to the indices and issues. Sound simple?
>> Yes. Will people take issue with this approach? Probably.
>>
>> I attended a dinner party last night at, Washington State
>> University, and a professor argued with me about how "yuppie"
>> 401k money would fuel the market to "infinity". This same
>> individual received the following email from me on 7/21
>> (reprinted in part):
>>
>> "We've finally approached an area that has me concerned in the
>> Dow. All my technical work is pointing to the downside since
>> Friday and I knew it would take a few days to set up. That
>> brings us to yesterday, today, tomorrow...or very, very soon.
>> Look out below. A correction would do this market good."
>>
>> This prof would rather argue and defend his positions, than
>> analyze and be flexible (he's one of these recent "market
>> geniuses", created in the last 8 years, with the buy and hold
>> strategy). It's tough to argue with someone who's used to
>> making 30% for the last couple years. My, how quickly the
>> market regurgitates 10% "chunks". We're going down hard in
>> September. After this "consolidation", which started on 8/5, is
>> completed, look for topping action in the indices and
>> immediately start screen for securities with the largest
>> volatility. If they also have technical topping patterns...sell
>> short. You ain't seen nothing yet.
>>
>> Steve Karnish
>> CCT
>>
>> ----------
>> > From: HARELSDB@xxxxxxx
>> > To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > Subject: Re: Weekly Pick (long)
>> > Date: Thursday, August 20, 1998 11:47 PM
>> >
>> > In a message dated 98-08-20 03:44:11 EDT, you write:
>> >
>> > << Pretty hard to support your contention, Dan -- most hedge
>> funds recognize
>> > and capitalize on some stocks going up while others go
>> down to achieve
>> > their superior performance.
>> > Livermore (Lefever) and crew faced simpler opponents in
>> simpler times.
>> >
>> >
>> > JMHO Bob >>
>> >
>> > I have given this a little more thought and I believe I have
>> come up with a
>> > probablistic argument that I think is difficult to refute.
>> >
>> > 1. A positive beta means that a stock moves in the same
>> direction as the
>> > market.
>> > 2. Most stocks have positive betas. (I found 588 stocks in a
>> database of
>> > 11,000 that have betas less than or equal to zero.)
>> >
>> > Conclusion: A trader that takes a position in a stock in the
>> same direction
>> > as the market is moving has a higher probability of success
>> because most
>> > stocks move in the same direction as the market.
>> >
>> > Please post if you see a flaw in my thinking.
>> >
>> > Dan
>> > Pocatello, ID, USA
>
>
>
|