|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Wong I think its a good thing to state your opinion concerning Jurik's
indicators. I have only seen a few negative posts about him and those were
from novice traders. The thing I don't like is Jurik's marketing polices to
sell his indicators. For example take a house, its far easier to sell a
house before its built than to wait until is actually built. The reason is
the mind makes it much better than it will actually be in reality. So when
people look at Jurik's description the mind perception will work in his
favor. The old catch 22 is if you find later you can't use it then guess
what your too lazy and ignorant. Look and see if he has the T3 used in
comparison instead of the old moving average at his web site. I'm not
saying he is anything but honest and a good guy all I'm saying is he sells
more indicators by not showing a demonstration. Is that wrong, not in my
opinion but its deceptive and that's a fact. Its like hypothetical results
compared to real time results one is the minds perception and the other is
reality. Once again this not an attach on Mark Jurik's character.
wong wrote:
>Hi All:
>
>I never want to be involved in a discussion between vendors and prospective
>buyers.
>
>However, since I've dealt with Mark, I can say DEFINITELY that he is an
>extremely helpful and friendly person, and has helped me and answered all
>my responses every time in the past.
>
>Regards,
>
>Wong
>============================================================================
>========
>At 01:32 PM 03/07/99 -0600, you wrote:
>>So in others words the free lookers didn't buy so you decided that wasn't
>>good for you.
>>You felt it better for the public to buy then be stuck with your indicator
>>if they didn't like or couldn't use them. I see why you call it a business
>>decision. Here's an idea if your satisfaction rate is 95.5 as you claim
>>then offer a money back offer during a limited trial period and have a 100%
>>satisfaction rate.
>>
>>Robert
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>I can understand your concern about there being no free trials. I'd be
>>suspect as well. Years ago we did offer it and discovered that free trial
>>testers were not willing spend the time to "unlearn" old habits gathered
>>from using lagging indicators, and learn new ways to apply low-lag signals.
>> For example, a common first-approach toward creating a MACD with JMA is to
>>use it for both the fast and slow crossover lines as follows:
>>>
>>>MyMACD = JRC.JMA(close,6,0) - JRC.JMA(close,30,0);
>>>
>>>However, the result is mediocre. This is because MACD actually *requires*
>>lag, but only *between* the two crossing lines. Therefore, for best
>>results, it's better that the slower line have as both lag and momentum so
>>that it does not weaken when price reverses. Otherwise, the crossover is
>>delayed as the faster line tries to meet the slower one (which is turning
>>away). A simple moving average has more lag and momentum than JMA. So a
>>better MACD would be as follows:
>>>
>>>MyMACD = JRC.JMA(close,6,0) - average(close,30);
>>>
>>>Learning when and where to add or remove lag in technical indicators takes
>>time, and we found that during a brief trial period, the user is not
>>committed to making the effort, and thus may decide JMA is not much better
>>than what he already has.
>>>
>>>We realize that having no free trials will discourage some from acquiring
>>our software, and that's OK. To help in the decision making process, our
>>web site displays numerous charts that point out JMA's advantages, and
>>posts a large collection of letters from users. We also try to provide
>>quality tech support (within reason).
>>>
>>>All in all, we're happy to have a user satisfaction rate better than 99.5%
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>
>>>Mark Jurik
>>>Jurik Research
>>>http://www.jurikres.com
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
|