Well thank you Xavier, I'm glad you see some value in these posts.
DTMC, somebody's IPO three months ago, exactly flat and no signs of promise for six weeks, then BAM, somebody must have released bad news, and the stock dropped by over half. That's where it languishes today, still no sign of life. Now that recommendation, whoever made it was thinking about their duties as a market maker, and not as a financial advisor for their client. And then the SOBs have the nerve to charge full-service commission, like they're really doing you a service! They want your money so they can unload their garbage, and since your money won't last long with them, they're on the phone all day long trying to get you and other people to send more money.
Now MARY, I just took a cursory glance, and that looks real good. Moving averages are positive, Stochastics just turned positive with today's trading, that one definitely warrants a closer look for possible immediate action.
That old cliche that "You must always do your homework with a broker" is nonsense. You must do your homework to find a reputable broker, but then you should be able to rely on them for genuine financial advice. There are a few out there, coincidentally one knocked at my door yesterday. After about 15 minutes of professional talking, I asked if he had recommendations, and he said Johnson and Johnson, and Lucent. Wow, I'd heard of those companies before! I looked at their charts, and super wow, they were stocks that had short- and long-term upward momentum. Now, that's advice worth paying for. Rather conservative, but still, genuine financial advice.
I mentioned earlier that a broker has a responsibility to determine your risk tolerance, and to recommend stocks accordingly. I'm putting the finishing touches on a piece that describes how compliance officers such as Phil (don't ask, don't tell) Gullo at LL circumvent the intent of this. It's important for those shops to classify you for speculative stocks, because in most cases, that's all they have to unload. The only way I found out that LL classified DWCH as speculative was by specific questioning.
It's one of those paradoxes. Once you know the questions to ask, you don't need a full-service broker. But until then, you don't even know what to ask (and rest assured, the disreputable ones won't tell you what to ask), so you're at the mercy of all the pathological liars that can manage to pass (or bribe) their way through the broker's exam. What really strikes me though is the vehemenence which many direct towards these broker education pieces (mostly on other threads). Social Darwinism as an ethical code of conduct was discredited over a century ago. These brokers are destroying the assets of a great many people who can ill afford it - it could be your mother they get hold of next. Their strategies and tactics need to be brought out in the open and constantly exposed.
I've been at it a little over a year now. If I look at only the trades that I picked, it would have been a very profitable year. Instead, all my profits were sucked dry by the leaches DWCH and EXSO (pushed by another over-the-counter shop, H. J. Meyers), recommended by frauds posing as financial advisors. It really is irrelevant though, a good education costs good money, and provides a decent rate of return. In spite of my focus on short-term indicators, I'm in this for the long-term. I've already recouped almost all the losses, so I got through my first year break-even. It should only get better.
Good luck to you and your friend. The more education you get on this vast field, the higher your probability of success.
Robert |
