|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
BobKC,
I don't believe I called you a liar and If so you have my apology, I am not
in the habit of doing that.
My point was simply don't make fun or poke jibes at something that does in
fact work for other people, just because you don't use it or believe in it.
I can show you many examples of where it has worked wonderfully in
commodities. If fundamentals work good for you fine, you won't find me
making comments about people who use it.
My decision to go 80% into zero's in 1998 was in fact based on charts,"that
to me" said many stocks "may" have reached peaks that may not be seen for
many years to come and that corrections, consolidations whatever you want to
call them might be coming, minimizing returns. Perhaps protection of capital
versus return on capital might be in order.
The question became what do I do with my money and the answer interestingly
came from two different hosts on CNBC in the late spring of 1998. As I
recall the first was E. Garzerelli (the women who made the call in 1987
before the crash), while still bullish she surprisingly recommended the
investors put 50% of what were then, enormous 3 1/2 year double digit gains,
into zeros. Her reasoning was sound, first the market was unlikely to
continue on such a tear and secondly at the prevailing rates, a double of
these enormous gains was guaranteed. Bottom line she said you could lose the
other 50% and still have what you started with. Made sense to me. Then along
came someone from Morgan (might have been Byron Wien?) and he basically
recommended the same thing. Lastly a number of friends were starting to
complain that their funds were no longer doing as well as the averages.
Bottom line is if you were not in "certain stocks" you were not seeing
upward progress, indicating to me a narrowing of the market. I decided at
that point to take my money substantially off the table and lock in a
double. I also moved 1/3 of a trust out of equities and into cash and
bonds. By the fall of 1998 I was feeling pretty good, then as you know the
"bubble began" . By late January of 2000 my brother questioned the move and
asked that the money be moved back into stocks saying the change was making
the trust under perform. I decided to find out and did the calculations,
presented them to the bank trust manager and asked that he verify the
results. Guess what, money sitting in money market and bonds had out
performed the equity funds by $17,000 during that time period (July 1998 to
January 2000), had the money be left in them. Now admittedly the funds are
not the best around but the trust requires the "bank's group" be used if
investments are to be in equities (STI Classic, they are very poorly rated
when compared to their peers). So overall maybe the move has not been bad in
both respects.
As for the rest of the money, I full time trade commodity futures (6 years)
and some stocks. I even recently have traded futures in tandem with another
person who often frequents this list and we work well together. His
technical expertise is very strong and a sharing of trading ideas has worked
well so far for both of us. I have never shorted a stock (until Amazon
recently), probably should have, not sure why. I certainly sell futures
(mainly US, ES, SF, EC, CC), so in that respect yes I have shorted this
declining market. I just never really learned to short stocks. This list has
been a great help in that respect (particularly Gitanshu).
For the record, I too lost money on T last year having bought 2000 shares at
$41.50 after the big drop, sold the 45 calls for $1.50 immediately, was
stopped out when it traded to $38 3/4 (7% below my buy)and the calls expired
worthless mitigating my loss. I also tried 2000 shares of INTC at $47.00
after the big drop (see a pattern here) and sold the 50 calls, bought them
back at 3/4, sold the 45 calls, for 2 1/2, and was stopped out at $41.00 for
a slight loss (should have listened to Gitanshu there). Long 2000 shares CDO
at 10 5/8 sold at 12 3/4, re-bought 2000 at 11 1/4 and sold at 15 3/4. That
was it for year, the rest was all futures which was much better and pays the
bills as well as college for two, and improves my savings. I still dabble
in an old business I have where I have some good contacts (Banks) that
remain loyal, about 1 hour a day max (after 3:15 mostly) but does well
considering the time spent.
Anyway that's it from me. Does KC mean Kansas City, just wondering, I just
did business with the Federal Reserve Bank there.
Good luck and good Trading,
don ewers
----- Original Message -----
From: "BobsKC" <bobskc@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2001 1:33 AM
Subject: Re: [RT] NAS
> You've opened up a pissing contest that could go on forever and you know
> it. You ignore the profitable announced trades and rant on about T ..
what
> you are really hot about is the fact that I don't believe that what has
> happened in history, with a different type of investor, has any validity
in
> today's market except that people who need/use charts and technical
> information often cause these things to happen themselves. .
>
> If you're actually a trader, why haven't you been short these past 2 1/2
> years? Seems to me that you're sitting in zero's and taking shots at
> actual traders on a trading mail list. Even calling people you don't
know,
> a liar. If such behavior makes you happy with yourself, have at it. It's
> your charactor that's on display. Any further shots will not be
responded
> to so feel free.
>
> Bob
>
> At 12:19 AM 1/6/01 -0600, you wrote:
> >"I only began posting more at the request of several members"
> >
> >Sorry don't buy it BobKC and am always suspicious of someone who states
that
> >kind of calling?
> >
> >You were/have been/are bragging and yes you have had some very bad calls
. .
> >. on the record.
> >
> >All any one on this list would ask is stop the "in the face stuff" about
> >reading charts, technical things whatever . . . . with such a record as
> >yours, you are no better bottom line and "your fundamentals have sucked"
big
> >time during this time period. I have had a "majority" of my investments
in
> >cash for a long time, I admit that, right or wrong but it does not mean I
> >have not been active in the markets on a short term basis and profitable,
as
> >may have been you. All can say is that, you were a bull and very wrong at
> >"risky times in my book" but shamed people for not being so and now you
are
> >a bear and seem to be now proud f it. If you called the Fed move earlier
> >great, but obvious to allot of us that things were falling apart and
> >something needed to be done. I moved out of stocks when the valuations
> >seemed unreasonable and risky to me personally, maybe too early but now
it
> >appears that was not all that bad of a decision, since I am on a great
deal
> >of my investments 2 1/2 years into some Zero's that look pretty good
right
> >now, 4 1/2 to go and I have a double, with no risk, smart . . . uhhhh
> >maybe, safe . . . yep . . . .after my 30+ years of investing also.
> >
> >Seems to me the fundamental approach has a ways to go too after all, but
> >then again buying T at those multiples and with their weak antiquated
story
> >and technology was not, one must admit, fundamentals . . more like
getting
> >caught up in a mania?
> >don ewers
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "BobsKC" <bobskc@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >Sent: Friday, January 05, 2001 9:48 PM
> >Subject: Re: [RT] NAS
> >
> >
> >> Damn.. I hate it when someone pastes posts from months ago, insults me
and
> >> does so with zero knowledge of when I got out of trades or at what
price I
> >> entered them. Yes, I've lost money in T and I lost three points in
ZIPL.
> >> I broke even in WCG and made 4.5 points in LOW .. I'm net 14 points to
the
> >> good in EPG over four trades and net 6 to the good in RIG. I've got
3.5+
> >> points in RRC on 14K shares and I believe that is all that were
mentioned
> >> in the pasted mails. I never mention day trades and due to my thin
> >> posting record, even most position trades have never been
> >> reported/mentioned, here.
> >>
> >> I stated that the chart folks would create a self fullfilling prophecy
> >> which it is certainly fair to say they did and I suggested a rate
decrease
> >> was coming before it was in vogue to believe that. I mentioned 1/2
point
> >> this month and warned of becoming confident after we got it.
> >>
> >> You skipped my second to last post where I talked about being in the
> >energy
> >> stocks which in my last post, I gave a report on how they did today.
> >Taken
> >> on its own, without the mail stating my positions, I suppose the last
one
> >> could have sounded like bragging ... oh well.. I only began posting
more
> >at
> >> the request of several members who seemed to think my 30+ years as a
> >trader
> >> might yield some valuable information for them but since you don't
see
> >it
> >> that way, I'll go back to my norm of seldom posting.
> >>
> >> I'm not sure what has irritated you so with my post today Don but I
doubt
> >> it is because you had a bad day in the markets since you've been in
cash
> >> for the past 2 1/2 years. If you wish to take this further, please
keep
> >> it off the mail list and just post to me directly. I doubt the list
> >> members are interested.
> >>
> >> Bob
> >>
> >>
> >> At 07:08 PM 1/5/01 -0600, you wrote:
> >> >
> >> >BobKC
> >> >This is interesting that you make this type of post now. . what
follows
> >> >are all your other ones starting from 9-7-00 . . . not a track record
one
> >> >would want to brag about . . . your favorite T sure did good . . .
(sorry
> >> >group but this is a long one, but follow the thread) . . . . .so not
> >sure
> >> >where you are coming from . . . but you may be a contrary indicator at
> >times
> >> >. . . that said glad you don't manage my money which admittedly has
been
> >in
> >> >cash way to early in July 1998 so missed allot but then I am willing
to
> >> >admit that . . . point being you come off as knowing everything . . .
> >well
> >> >guess not, at least from 9-7-00 . . . read and . . .
> >> >I expect flack from this post but really . . . .
> >> >don ewers
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >> realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx
|