Do you use Fundamentals

[SOCRATES]

ducatti calling me a buffoon will not extricate you from the predicament you have put yourself in as a consequence of your attitude.

The post in question is charliechan's post number 53 above.

As for Arbitrage, I was doing Arbitrage when you were in short pants, voice, with two telephones, so do not be impertinent.

Just answer his questions properly and let us not have any more bluster, ducatti, please.

Just answer the questions, correctly, that's all.

 

[ducati998]

Soccy

Save the arbitrage question all were answered in the post immediately following.
If you disagree, then highlight the specific question(s).

Otherwise, as usual, you are just wasting time.
d998

 

[ducati998]

Soccy

Look out behind you, its that fundamental in an Enron baseball cap come to get you AGAIN.
d998

 

[SOCRATES]

Soccy

Save the arbitrage question all were answered in the post immediately following.
If you disagree, then highlight the specific question(s).

Otherwise, as usual, you are just wasting time.
d998

The specific questions are all the questions that he asked.
I am telling you one last time so that you know that everyone knows your responses are meaningless, sarcastic, rude and inappropriate, and bear the hallmark of crude ingrained ignorance and patent stubborness.

 

[ducati998]

Soccy

I am telling you one last time so that you know that everyone knows your responses are meaningless, sarcastic, rude and inappropriate, and bear the hallmark of crude ingrained ignorance and patent stubborness.

All the questions have been answered, excepting a detailed explanation of arbitrage, but that is beyond your capabilities, therefore pointless exercise.

Do you actually read any posts other than your own?
Go back to page 6, and lo and behold..............answers to the questions.

cheers d998

 

[SOCRATES]

The answer, ducatti, is that you have not got the answers at all, and the reason for this is that you insist on trying to force fit your ideas, which are really prejudices, in the hope that this will let you off the hook, as a consequence of members giving up with you and shrugging off your pronouncements.

I am not letting you off the hook ducatti, I am not. This is because you persist in not being upfront and admitting that from the perverse angle that you habitually view this it does not satify the questions put to you by charliechan in his post above number 53.

You may be able to get your silly and irrelvant replies past a lot of members of this website, but you will not succeed in getting them past me. Now go back and answer the questions properly without creating any futher diversion by bringing in remarks about arbitrage.

Just go back to charliechan's post number 53 and answer the question properly, and if you cannot, let this be a lesson to you to remain silent or humbly admit you do not know or can not provide an answer according to your frame of reference.

But since you pop your head above the parapet when you ought not to, you get everything you deserve from me.

Now answer the questions correctly, ducatti, really.

 

[ducati998]

Soccy

Obviously you must suffer a lesion to "Wernickes" area of the cortex. The symptoms that are so obviously manifesting themselves, take their origin from area 39, with a possible further lesion manifest within the visual cortex..............this could explain your trading in a darkened "star-chamber".

Of course, you could simply be as mad as a box of frogs.
Either way, the message is obviously not quite penetrating to the cognitive centres is it.

Lets go really slowly.
To all the questions on post #53, excepting a detailed answer on arbitrage......are you ready?
Wait for it....................................
Here it comes.........................................

THE............. ANSWERS.............. HAVE ............ALREADY.............. BEEN................ POSTED.

cheers d998

 

[charliechan]

well said socrates!

we have him by the short and curlies.

hilarious!! ducati doesnt even know what arbitrage is!

i'll tell you what arbitrage isn't ducati - it isnt a big word to be used to try and impress people in order to feign intelligence and knowledge, especially when the author doesnt understand the word.

 

[sp1]

Hello all,

I would like to contribute my thoughts not because i think them correct or instructive but to test them against the experience of others, In the hope to learn though your collective feed back (particularly Socrates, I have sent a PM to you).

Am i right that the big question D998 has avoided is "insight" d998 seems to think that all can be learned from historical filings. D998 seems amiss to the fact that they can only show long trends rather than step changes in the PRESENT business enviroment. "Perception of this change particularly when they mark turning points " can provide speculation ideas.

eg all the supermarkets can do analysis on thier customers changing shopping and financing habits through the loyalty cards, but we can do some of if buy looking at the trolleys of the shoppers and the manifestations of thier demographic profile that most people adorn them self with in public.

I think i have noticed an increase of people in Poundland that from thier clothes dont look hard up.

and surveys show that many people are pessimist on the uk economy but most of them think thier personal finaces will be ok. Cleary some if not most of the responds finaces will suffer if the economy does. When the realisation kicks in for that group theier spending behaviour and sentiment will change.

All though and much help much appreciated.

Sp1

 

[SOCRATES]

well said socrates!

we have him by the short and curlies.

hilarious!! ducati doesnt even know what arbitrage is!

i'll tell you what arbitrage isn't ducati - it isnt a big word to be used to try and impress people in order to feign intelligence and knowledge, especially when the author doesnt understand the word.

Hello Charlie, now that he is in the box himself that he says is for frogs and other nonsense,
would you like to soc it to him or would you prefer that I do it ?

 

[OpenMind]

I agree with Charliechan in that a private investor cannot compete with insitutions in acquisitions of information, or the quality of information. But does quality information always lead to quality insight? Because that would imply that the ordinary private investor then never stands a chance against the big guys.

Please correct me if I am talking nonsense. This is my first post here, so please go easy.

Many thanks.

 

[SOCRATES]

No, ;you are not talking nonsense.

What you have done, however is interrupted a crucial point in a debate between charliechan, ducatti and myself.

To put you in the picture, since you are a newcomer and obviously inexperienced, is that a lot of nonsesnse is posted by people who ought to keep quiet and not give opinions about that which they know zero about, which is what the debate between the three of us is all about.

Now you come along in the middle of this with a question.

Ok, the answer is no. The private investor is in a different league to the institutions. The institutions are under constant pressure to invest the vast amounts of money flows they handle. They have to find investments capable of absorbing these vast amounts of money without as far as is practicable, disturbing the market. Institutions cannot wait and mark time until conditions are absolutely right for them to enter. They have to be in the market all the time.

The private investor, by contrast does not have the problem of having to be in the market all the time, nor to find investements capable of accommodating vast sums, nor is he under pressure except tor the pressure he places upon himself.

Additionally, the prvate investor is answerable only to himself, and, is not restricted in his choice of investment vehicle and does not have to be in the market all the time.

I hope and trust that this answers your question, and now let us wait for charliechan to reply to my post above number 70, if you please.

 

[OpenMind]

Thank you Socrates. Appreciate your reply. My apologies for causing the interruption.

 

[SOCRATES]

That's OK ~ now let us wait for charliechan to decide who is going to fire the cannonballs, him or me.

Welcome to Trade to Win, by the way.

 

[LION63]

OpenMind,

Would you join in a crap game if you knew the house were using loaded dice? Or would you sit at a table where the players are using a marked deck? If the answer to these questions is No then what do you think possesses rational human beings to put their hard earned money on the line in the financial markets if they truly believe that the markets are rigged against them?

It is quite simply that they try and justify failure and ineptness by blaming everyone and everything else but themselves. Those that make money on these boards do not whinge about price fixing, support mechanisms, lack of disclosure or an inability to obtain information instead of that, they ensure that they know what they are doing and do it well.

You will be much better served paying attention to the people that KNOW what they are talking about as opposed to the nay sayers that do not really contribute in any positive manner to discussions but continuously endeavour to discredit others without venturing any alternatives of their own.

There you are, post 73 is an example of what I have said - Good advice that has answered your question without slating others or seeking to justify ineptness.

Socrates,

Sorry for interrupting the three way duel that has developed, I will once again withdraw to the sidelines whilst we await a response from CharlieChan. (I fear that he has gone to see Number I son and will not be back for a while).

 

[RUDEBOY]

LION63, i like your above post, it makes sense, very much so. In this world of 'blame everybody else' we live in, maybe a trader, a good trader, is a humble person who can 'accept', you have to 'accept' on the markets, otherwise you are 'dead in the water', or so to speak. The market(s) are a great leveller, you have only yourself to blame! Sorry about the distraction! RB.

 

[RUDEBOY]

Ducatti, 'RISK MANAGEMENT' (in the form of investment/trading) relies on FA. FA timescale? Which end do you chose? RB. P.S. Do 'TAKE OVERS' require a 'DOUBLE STOP'? Where should stops be placed on a 'take over'? And why? Which way round?

 

[ducati998]

Rude

Ducatti, 'RISK MANAGEMENT' (in the form of investment/trading) relies on FA. FA timescale? Which end do you chose? RB. P.S. Do 'TAKE OVERS' require a 'DOUBLE STOP'? Where should stops be placed on a 'take over'? And why? Which way round?

Risk management relies upon the fundamentals, correct, as your risk can be looked at in two very broad terms, business risk, and market risk.

Fundamental analysis ignores market risk, instead focusing on business, or credit risk.
Technical analysis, in the purest form ignores credit risk, and focuses on market risk.

As regarding timescale, it really depends upon your position ( style employed ).
As an example, a pure directional trade, ( all examples posted ) GM, CTEL, NEN, TELOZ, DIA, are all value plays, and I would give them around 2yrs. However saying that TELOZ reached the target in 2weeks, GM, in about 3weeks, and the other 3 are currently open.

For a "Bankruptcy" it is very dependant upon the courts and Trustees.
Arbitrages, last about 20mins, the length of time to open and close the positions.

Risk arbitrage, or Mergers & Aquisitions are high risk, hence the name, and I don't indulge, but if you were to, I would recommend a "technical" stoploss.

cheers d998

 

[SOCRATES]

OpenMind,

Would you join in a crap game if you knew the house were using loaded dice? Or would you sit at a table where the players are using a marked deck? If the answer to these questions is No then what do you think possesses rational human beings to put their hard earned money on the line in the financial markets if they truly believe that the markets are rigged against them?

It is quite simply that they try and justify failure and ineptness by blaming everyone and everything else but themselves. Those that make money on these boards do not whinge about price fixing, support mechanisms, lack of disclosure or an inability to obtain information instead of that, they ensure that they know what they are doing and do it well.

You will be much better served paying attention to the people that KNOW what they are talking about as opposed to the nay sayers that do not really contribute in any positive manner to discussions but continuously endeavour to discredit others without venturing any alternatives of their own.

There you are, post 73 is an example of what I have said - Good advice that has answered your question without slating others or seeking to justify ineptness.

Socrates,

Sorry for interrupting the three way duel that has developed, I will once again withdraw to the sidelines whilst we await a response from CharlieChan. (I fear that he has gone to see Number I son and will not be back for a while).

And a good morning to you Sir, and just a couple of lines to comment that I applaud your outlining of what are unassailable fundamental truths.

May I add that what you express in your second paragraph again is spot on, in fact, I will admit to you that these schisms about price fixings, support mechanisms, lack of disclosure and dealilng with information to which to a certain extent is screened, etcetera, are not only viewed as challenges and obstacles to be overcome, but are in fact WELCOMED, as they enhance the benefits of edges acquired over many years of work, and serve to sift out the lazy, the inept, the opinionated, the impatient, the greedy, the unaware, and the impulsive.

I await the return of charliechan from whatever peregrinations he is engaged in as the ordnance is mounting in his absence.

Kind Regards.

 

[ducati998]

Back to the blind leading the blind.

d998