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 : DELL Bear Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Moominoid who wrote (1627)	8/23/1998 3:17:00 AM
From: lin luo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2578

OK, try your equations on CA. See what do you get.

To: Moominoid who wrote (1627)	8/23/1998 6:11:00 PM
From: lin luo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2578

Did you get anything for CA (Computer Associates)? It will be interesting to see your conclusions.

To: Moominoid who wrote (1627)	8/27/1998 1:44:00 AM
From: Chuzzlewit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2578

That doesn't mean there isn't a stochastic trend. That sounds like an oxymoron to me. I use the word 'stochastic' to mean random. I've been reading your posts for some time and trying to figure out what you are getting at, and I'm frankly confused. You acknowledge that ARIMA modeling consistently fails in generating usable forecasting models, yet you seem to think Bollinger bands are useful. I think its fair to say that BBs are surrogates for the standard deviation of the trend line, but if that trend line is useless for the purposes of forecasting future prices, how can we begin to talk about a standard deviation? Furthermore, if you think of BBs as surrogates for standard deviation there is nothing magic about them (as in 'bouncing off the lower BB', etc.). They would not be barriers, but they would simply represent the spread of normalized residuals around a a statistically determined trendline. The other thing that confuses me greatly is that you along with other TA practitioners fail to take into account external events. That is, even if trend lines were discoverable all other things being equal, in the real world all other things are not equal. News is constantly forthcoming. Yet nowhere in TA do I see an adjustment or an elimination of subsets of data owing to news that would put the price of the stock on a different trendline. A simple example: suppose a company reports much better than expected results. I have yet to see a technician say "we can't analyze this stock because the amount of data following the news is an insufficient base upon which to draw conclusions". TTFN, CTC