A.I.M Users Group Bulletin Board Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : A.I.M Users Group Bulletin Board

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Steve Grabczyk who wrote (9897)	1/8/2000 5:36:00 PM
From: fuzzymath	Read Replies (1) of 18928

Interesting Steve, and almost convincing, but... There does seem to be a pattern exactly of the type I try to hone in on with my methods. But 7 out of 10 samples is not a necessarily really significant statistically. Still, the Government does make the entire year-transition period very subject to unusual behavior by investors to to potential tax savings and penalties. It would be nice to see this study for all years, not just the years that end in 0. If the cause is taxes, then you'd expect to see these early highs in quite a few bearish years. It's the "years that end in 0" that bothers me. Why? What's the underlying fundamental reason for this to happen? One can note that in all election years ending in 0 except 1980 the phenomenon happened. So, maybe is there greater uncertainty in years when a presidential election is occuring? To know this, we'd have to study all years evenly divisible by 4. This indeed is a curious pattern that Peter Eliades noticed. I might spend more time on it to answer some of the above questions (if I can find the time). Thanks for showing us the article! Kevin

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next