|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Shawn Andrew wrote:
<....just remember "it is not how right or how wrong you are that matters but
how
much you make when right and how much you do not lose when wrong".....>
Great trading wisdom....and right to the point. And yes, it
is a poor soul and disturbed mind indeed that would
masquerade as "knowledge" what it is trying to sell as ego.
Scheier
> I have watched this back and forth arguments against scheier. I will simply
> point all of you to the study published on ECB's website. The Fed's
> knowingly try to surprise the shorts to get a sporadic covering effect. This
> gives them momentum and confidence in their moves. You wouldn't truly
> consider +15 point moves in stocks due to buying.
> What Scheier has been trying to ring home is that their is predilection to
> treat shorts unfairly. Trying to change such a bias would be trying to
> rewrite history.
> I further consider the words "Professional" a misnomer in light of the
> person verbage used against a fellow trader. And yes we humans are never in
> possession of knowledge. We function on the principles of eoliths.
> Scheier instead of trying make your point to many who simply do not care
> just remember "it is not how right or how wrong you are that matters but how
> much you make when right and how much you do not lose when wrong".
> Further today's US economy, the moment of truth has arrived. "You can lead
> the horse to the Well. But is it drinking?"
> If Greenspan has found the elixir vitoe of controlling Markets I would be
> very surprised. Unintended consequences abound.
>
> Regards
> Shawn
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Brown" <markbrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Omega List" <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 6:56 AM
> Subject: Re: Reality/ Re: the Fed
>
> > Hello scheier,
> >
> > sir you are the one who is missing something, and i want to help you
> > find it. "knowledge" is what you need and there is nothing wrong with
> > not having it but there is something wrong with not seeking it.
> >
> > the market itself told you what it was going to do, there were many
> > different signals all disclosed here by others in recent post about how
> > they too were seeing market anomalies that shouted at you the
> > direction of the impending move and at the very least if not direction
> > that a move of significant magnitude was imminent.
> >
> > i suggest you take everything you fundamentally think you know and as
> > we say in texas "shitcan it" other places call this file 13 i belive.
> >
> > then visit a local insane asylum and see if you can get a good ole
> > fashion shock treatment or two, just to burn out any cob web ideas you
> > may still have about your intelligence being able to process
> > fundamental data to arrive at some apparent knowledge. "NOT"
> >
> > AND PLEASE do not make the mistake of thinking that so called "Market
> > Professionals" (of which i an one) are as unenlightened as you think.
> >
> > now that we have all that out of the way i suggest that you get your
> > self a good computer and a set of ear plugs (if you watch financial
> > tv) until you have learned the discipline of doing the opposite of
> > apparent hype. now what to do with the computer? each hour on the hour
> > go into the room where it resides and worship it for 10 minutes at
> > least in whatever fashion you feel comfortable with. meditate and
> > surrender to its superior knowledge, chanting i am ignorant and it
> > knows all. i will give you further instructions after you have
> > completed this humbling experience for at least 6 months. call me.
> >
> > otherwise you may want to just try a buy and hold for 20 year
> > approach, it takes less work and thinking.
> >
> > mark
> >
> > s> Once again, the point is missed. The oncoming rate hike
> > s> was well publicized. The point is the intentional surprise
> > s> the Fed used to release the news so as to maximize its leverage
> > s> against market participants, many of them professionals and
> > s> market liquidity providers, at the hour of the day most likely
> > s> to cause the most damage. The question is whether the Fed
> >
|