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.

Pastimes : CNBC -- critique. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: capitalistbeatnik who wrote (1368)	8/9/1998 10:03:00 PM
From: Thomas M.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17683

...probability analysis shows ... streaks [don't] exist... Perhaps academic statisticians believe this. Fortunately, they're not managing anyone's money, or, even worse, coaching professional sports. <g> In the real world, medical analysis has shown that athletes in "the zone" are in an altered physiological state. Tom

To: capitalistbeatnik who wrote (1368)	8/9/1998 10:16:00 PM
From: Ted David	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 17683

With regard to bloodletting, unwittingly it was a major help in lowering high blood pressure, albeit only for only a while. And then they bled the patient again. Everything has it's time and place! td

To: capitalistbeatnik who wrote (1368)	8/10/1998 2:29:00 AM
From: Toby Zidle	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 17683

James, the arguments pro and con re Technical Analysis are on many threads on SI/Yahoo/et al boards. Somehow predetermined attitudes (on both sides) stay predetermined, so the whole subject is really a waste of space. Opinions will not be changed. Having said that, look at stocks with long 'streaks' up or down. For instance, DELL, MSFT, IBM, ORCL, IOM, PRST. You don't think that if you put a trend line on DELL two years ago, it might have told you that it was a good investment for the future? Put a trend line on IOM from 4/97 to 11/97. You don't think that the price cutting down through that trend line could be giving a clue that the future was going to be difficult? Look at stocks that always seem to trade in a range - NAUT, for instance. You don't think the cyclic repetitions from 25 to 30 to 25 to 30, etc., that you see on a chart should give you a concept that this stock can be bought at $25 and sold at $30 regularly with little risk? No one who uses T.A. will claim it's foolproof. The interpretation is dynamic and needs regular monitoring. Trends do end and cycles do fail. But hopefully, T.A. gives some enhanced measure of warning. Fundamental analysis also gives warnings, but perhaps with less timeliness. And T.A. does not help time buyouts or earnings busts. No one claims it's omnipotent. Nonetheless, nearly everyone who studies and uses Technical Analysis will say it improves investment performance and reduces risk. And that's all one could want. I know, James, that I haven't changed your mind. Tell me one thing about Random Walk. If there's as much likelihood of down movements as up movements (a binary system), how can you explain that DELL, MSFT, and INTC are not at the same price level now as 2, 3, or 5 years ago? You deny 'streaks'; yet the direction of long-term price movement is self-evident. If you want to say LONG-term, it will all even out, perhaps you're right. I can't project 5 or 10 years in the future. But the technical analyst should be able to call the down-trend once it shows on a chart and be able to take advantage of it. I really don't think the CNBC thread is the place for any extended discussion of pro/con technical analysis, but I'd be interested in your response to my comments. If one wants to contend that statistically (academically) one can't make money from interpreting charts, I can only say in real life T.A. does make money for me -- not EVERY time, but certainly this is NOT a zero-sum game.