Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Technology Stocks : AUTOHOME, Inc -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ahhaha who wrote (14007)	8/11/1999 10:02:00 AM
From: RocketMan	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 29970

Knowledge proves that the game is not beatable. It is structured not to be just like Vegas' staying open depends on the games of chance having negative expected returns. If stock trading had a positive expected return, everyone would play it. The usual argument I get at this point is that some have special abilities or systems. Random selection has a better a priori expectation than such abilities and systems. That is an interesting comment. So let's say that, at the elementary level, the market is a random walk with positive drift. Although the drift is barely detectable in the near term as compared with the daily or weekly variability. With such a model, I can understand why you would say that a random selection (say, going in and out at random times during the day) might beat any other day trading strategy. Random selection at least provides the same expectation as the long term drift, ignoring the (not insignificant) trading costs. On the other hand, trying to forecast random movements is not only futile, but a losing strategy. The worst would be if one was lucky in the near term, and continued to play under the illusion that could actually forecast such movements.