|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
sO THE "FREE" DATA IS MORE RELIABLE THAN THE PAY SERVICES? WE WILL NEVER BE
ABLE TO FIND A "PERFECT" SITE WITH THE MOST RELIABLE SERVICE. COMPUTERS AND
THEIR SERVICES MAKE ERRORS, I MAKE MOREE THAN THEY DO? AS WITH MOST OF YOU
OUT THERE, I HAVE TRIED MOST OF THE SITES. tRIED REUTERS, GOT PISSED OFF
WITH THE "ID 800". TRIED TELESCAN, SAME TYPE OF PRBLEMS. bUT I STILL
RATHER PAY THE 60.00 THAN SIT FOR HOURS TO "FIND" FREE UNRELIABLE DATA. THE
EXCEL PROJECT IS GREAT TO PLAY AROUND WITH, I AM JUST STARTING TO LEAN VB6
AND C++6, BUT UNTIL SOMEONE CAN STEER ME TOWARDS THE "FREE" DATA I WILL
THROUGH AWAY THE 60.00
REGARDS
BRAD
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Jim Michael
> Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 1999 10:11 PM
> To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: data download template
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, 16 Mar 1999, Bradley C. Mitchell wrote:
>
> > I am sorry but after all the time trying to find and setup for
> "free data",
> > the $60.00 is well worth the price per month. My time is more
> valuable than
> > that. If we are spending so much time trying to save $60 then maybe we
> > should not be in the market. Just honest input, nothing personal
>
> The first rule I learned was preservation of capital. $60 per month spent
> needlessly is $60 on which no return is seen, compounded monthly. If your
> $60 /mo gets you more accurate data, or if your time spent getting the $60
> data vs. the free data yields a higher return, both of which I doubt, then
> I would tend to agree with your position. Also, remember this is kind of a
> cutting edge approach to getting data. I think the Excel initiatives are
> pretty interesting. The Office 2000 version of Excel is going to have some
> good data mining capabilities, so I've heard.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jim
>
|