OT..Daniel I am very happy that you remain true to engineering accuracy standards because that is what I would expect from you.
So for the sake of accuracy, and not to mislead anybody,I will correct my post: I had an extremely large increase in my NN holdings ( much larger than your average downpayment on a home is the best I can describe it so as not to appear ostentatious,g).
Because just prior to, I held no NN I think this increase can thus be described as big (g)though not as big as as my 24,000 share position in 1996. I like to invest in few stocks at any one time period but in large quantity.I trade often.
I hope this meets with your satisfaction,
cheers,
:-))
TA
OT:
> Daniel, Re: > I increased my position 100%!!<G> ( I had none before, <G> ).
> That is not an increase of 100%.
> Daniel
> It's called literary license. Politicians use it often,
And how are we supposed to know that you know what increasing one's position
by 100% really means and that you're not mathematically illiterate (like the
engineering magazine column author who thought that a 15% increase in
productivity would be sufficient to counteract 15% layoff)?
Look, a lot of numbers get passed around on SI. The more you deviate from
correctness, the more you risk your credibility (which isn't something of which
politicians have a lot).
Daniel |
