Page 29 of 58

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:33 am
by pmward
dualstow wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:06 am
pmward wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 8:12 pm
dualstow wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 8:00 pm
You can call any non-whim decision on earth quant, but it’s still misleading.
No it is not misleading. What is misleading is trying to define the words "quantitative analysis" in a short sighted and overly tight manner to only mean one very specific form of quantitative analysis, and to choose to ignore all others.
VTSAX doesn't literally buy every stock in the market... there are plenty they leave out, and the stocks chosen and left out are done using quantitative algorithms.
Moreover, how did you choose the PP? Quantitative analysis. How did you choose buy and hold strategy? More quantitative analysis.
For the sake of beginning investors out there, not for my sake, please give us all an example of investing that isn’t quant. If you can’t, does the term having have any meaning anymore?

Or are you just muddying the waters for people who should really learn about indexing and lazy portfolios first, and all for the sake of being pedantic?
Yes that is my point exactly, and why I've been wondering why you have taken so much offense simply to me stating that indexing, the PP, and buy and hold are quantitative strategies. This was the only point I made, that you started pushing back on. There is no way those things can be classified as not being quantitative in nature. It makes no sense why you would deny this. Now within quantitative strategies, you may have some you favor and some you don't. There are certainly some that are better for beginners, and some that are not. There are certainly some that are better for the average Joe, and some that are better for professionals. There are certainly some that will fit a certain individual better than others. I have said nothing regarding any of those subjective points, I think you're arguing with things you've assumed not things I've said. I stated above that I have no interest in trying to convert anyone to any particular style. But if anyone has questions and wants to know about the technical side of things, which I am very experienced, I am more than happy to discuss. You can choose to be entertained by my gibbering about technicals, you can choose to ignore it, but there is no reason to be offended by it. In general, I don't believe having a closed mind on any subject is a good thing. One should always remain open. I don't bash any investment style personally, because in the right hands they all work.

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:42 am
by pmward
sophie wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 7:35 am
I just feel obliged to support dualstow here, since he and I have similar opinions on stock trading....

There are two ways to invest in stocks. One is passive, buying an index or basket of stocks and holding them long term in the context of a fixed multi-asset portfolio. The other is active, where you watch signals of various kinds (or just your own gut feeling) to determine when to time purchases and sales.

The data CLEARLY show that passive beats active management over the long term about 95% of the time. Can you win big with active management? Yes, but it's rare. Also, unless you trade stocks for a living, the time you spend on active management is time you are not spending on furthering your own career - which comes at a cost which may offset any potential gains you get from your active stock playing.

Harry Browne made all these points very elegantly and succinctly in his books and radio show. Fail Safe Investing is a very quick read and a good place to start. Jack Bogle has said much the same.

Pmward, you certainly can enjoy your active management style all you want. However, realize that this board concerns the Permanent Portfolio, which is based on a passive investment philosophy. There is a "variable portfolio" section for discussions that do concern active investing, so I suggest you confine your active management comments there. Harry Browne also had useful tips for active investing, if you read his books.
Just like Dualstow, you're putting a whole lot of words in my mouth that I have not spoken. I agree with general statements you've made here, especially in regards to the average investor. I don't see the need for people to take offense and start brining out the pitchforks just because someone discusses technicals. You have your opinions, I have mine. I don't take offense when other people state an opinion on an investing style different than mine. For gods sake, I have 80% of my money in a PP for one of the very reasons you mentioned, because while I was very successful in technical trading, it was overly time consuming and took away from other areas of my life that I held at a higher priority. And I have read all of Browne's books, and listened to all of his radio show, and I admire Browne. You know this, so talking down to me by recommending I read his work is demeaning. But I also have studied a lot of technical traders and admire them as well. There is not one blessed right way to invest. It's also ok to mix strategies and to speculate. Harry himself made his fortune speculating after all. He was one of the greatest speculators of his time. Let's not forget that.

If you all are going to rip someone apart every time they discuss something other than the PP please let me know now and I'll move on and stop coming here. Everyone on this board participates in speculating in what they think is going to happen in the future. Literally 90% of the comments on this board, even in the PP section, are just this. But the moment someone tries to back their opinion up with technical or quantitative analysis, people bust out the flame throwers. It's ridiculous and it's hypocritical.

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:15 am
by Xan
pmward wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:33 am
dualstow wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:06 am
For the sake of beginning investors out there, not for my sake, please give us all an example of investing that isn’t quant. If you can’t, does the term having have any meaning anymore?

Or are you just muddying the waters for people who should really learn about indexing and lazy portfolios first, and all for the sake of being pedantic?
Yes that is my point exactly, and why I've been wondering why you have taken so much offense simply to me stating that indexing, the PP, and buy and hold are quantitative strategies.
I believe Dualstow's point is that if everything is called "quantitative", then the term doesn't have any meaning anyway. So we either have to throw it out, or come up with something new to describe something specific.

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:28 am
by pmward
Xan wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:15 am
pmward wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:33 am
dualstow wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:06 am
For the sake of beginning investors out there, not for my sake, please give us all an example of investing that isn’t quant. If you can’t, does the term having have any meaning anymore?

Or are you just muddying the waters for people who should really learn about indexing and lazy portfolios first, and all for the sake of being pedantic?
Yes that is my point exactly, and why I've been wondering why you have taken so much offense simply to me stating that indexing, the PP, and buy and hold are quantitative strategies.
I believe Dualstow's point is that if everything is called "quantitative", then the term doesn't have any meaning anyway. So we either have to throw it out, or come up with something new to describe something specific.
I agree. I made a general point, that indexing was a quantitative strategy. Of which he then took issue. Unless he can prove this is an incorrect statement, which he cannot, then his argument is not justified. He is arguing with his assumptions of what I meant, not what I actually meant. I was not making a statement about the finer specific quantitative strategy he was referring to. I was making a statement at a higher level. Because he does not support one very specific form of quantitative strategy, he is taking issue with me stating the true fact that the strategy he does support is also a quantitative strategy. It indeed makes no sense, which is why I'm getting very frustrated with this thread right now. I don't feel I deserve to be singled out and pounced on by the group for stating a true fact. Can anybody prove this fact wrong? Please I beg of someone to do so. If you cannot, then you realize this whole thing is pointless and over nothing. It's nothing more than people not liking the fact that a strategy they subjectively like can objectively be labelled with a name that they subjectively do not like. It's pointless. A peach is a peach, regardless of whether or not you like the work peach.

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:41 am
by Kbg
A couple of points/thoughts.

Pmward is right...you wouldn't be in the PP if not for its quantitative appeal and we know for a fact HB and I forget the gentlemen's name did quantitative analysis on this stuff in the late 70s/80s which is how they came up with the initial concept.

I like Cullen Roche's point...if you aren't following the total global asset allocation of all investable assets then you are making an active bet in some form or fashion.

The forum is divided into a PP and a VP section. Personally, I post asset related things in the asset rooms and non PP portfolio stuff in the VP section. I think technical analysis of assets really belongs in the VP. However, for the asset scream and dream rooms it does get a bit fuzzy on what the intent of them is and they tend to be BS (in the good sense of BSing) type rooms.

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:49 am
by pmward
Kbg wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:41 am
A couple of points/thoughts.

Pmward is right...you wouldn't be in the PP if not for its quantitative appeal and we know for a fact HB and I forget the gentlemen's name did quantitative analysis on this stuff in the late 70s/80s which is how they came up with the initial concept.

I like Cullen Roche's point...if you aren't following the total global asset allocation of all investable assets then you are making an active bet in some form or fashion.

The forum is divided into a PP and a VP section. Personally, I post asset related things in the asset rooms and non PP portfolio stuff in the VP section. I think technical analysis of assets really belongs in the VP. However, for the asset scream and dream rooms it does get a bit fuzzy on what the intent of them is and they tend to be BS (in the good sense of BSing) type rooms.
Thank you Kbg, especially for pointing out that the scream and dream rooms tend to be very off topic in general. I had a reason to "scream" in that I did make an active move in my VP, and as soon as I made that move it started going against me. Moreover, the way it went against me changed my short to medium term view entirely. Small caps and value are both breaking out and holding, this changes everything for me. I see this as a big shift in the markets, potentially akin to both the gold breakout earlier this year and the rally that came off of the December lows. So I felt it a worthwhile thing to discuss, as my views haven't changed in many months. So essentially, my view changed from where it was in all my past comments on this forum for the last couple of months. I have since enacted my Plan B, and all is right in the world in my VP. But to me, this happening was big news. If I would have known that I would have half the forum breaking out the torches and pitchforks over my comment I wouldn't have shared. I was trying to spur an interesting discussion, not create an argument or debate on the validity of technical or quantitative analysis. I'm ok to agree to disagree on this point. I wasn't trying to get in a debate on this, I was hoping others would discuss my findings and share their unique views and reasoning behind it. I though it was an interesting point of topic. I did not realize it would turn into all of this.

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:36 pm
by dualstow
What Xan said.
And for the record, I am not even remotely "offended." I feel strongly about my point but all is well over here, and I think hope you are fine, too.
Kriegsspiel wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:04 am
dualstow wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:14 am
Harry, Rule #3 in Fail-Safe

It's weird reading those quotes. Because really, if you're buying shares of companies that you don't even know about, on the hope that they'll be productive over the long run, but you don't know if they're actually shitty companies or profitable... isn't that the real speculation? Consider the definition of speculative (engaged in, expressing, or based on conjecture rather than knowledge) and conjecture (an opinion or conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information).

I think of it more as allocating, like Cullen Roche does, instead of investing.

IE, you're allocating when you designate a certain % of your wealth towards stock ownership, regardless of what those companies are doing or how they're performing at any time. And you're investing/speculating when you investigate and specify where your money is going. Investing/speculating is more of a business activity, and allocating is more of a personal finance/behavioral finance activity.
Not really, kriegs. I mean that's a semantical game that no one can really win, because there's no authority on it.

It's risk-taking when you buy stocks for the long term, even if you're buying the broad market.

One could pick apart these words ad absurdam, and then what is the point of having any categories at all?
You could prospect for gold because you heard there might be deposits in the hills and start digging randomly.
A farmer can buy seeds from a reputable source and plant them on the land he knows well.
You can buy a stock for a company you don't really believe in, but you like the way the patterns of activity look.
You can buy the broad market.
You can have a 100% treasury portfolio.
There is a spectrum of risk-taking here, even if we don't want to strictly put each one into investing or speculating. It's very clear. To turn around and say that every choice is based on some kind of analysis, well- is not saying very much of anything.

Caveats about past performance notwithstanding, you can know something about stock market investing, decide if you want to take risk in the market, and *invest* in the broad market. If you say that is the real speculation because you haven't studied the 3,000+ companies, then I don't know what "investing" is. But I would definitely say yours is a false premise.

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 3:29 pm
by Kriegsspiel
dualstow wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:36 pm
Kriegsspiel wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:04 am

It's weird reading those quotes. Because really, if you're buying shares of companies that you don't even know about, on the hope that they'll be productive over the long run, but you don't know if they're actually shitty companies or profitable... isn't that the real speculation? Consider the definition of speculative (engaged in, expressing, or based on conjecture rather than knowledge) and conjecture (an opinion or conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information).

I think of it more as allocating, like Cullen Roche does, instead of investing.

IE, you're allocating when you designate a certain % of your wealth towards stock ownership, regardless of what those companies are doing or how they're performing at any time. And you're investing/speculating when you investigate and specify where your money is going. Investing/speculating is more of a business activity, and allocating is more of a personal finance/behavioral finance activity.
Not really, kriegs. I mean that's a semantical game that no one can really win, because there's no authority on it.

It's risk-taking when you buy stocks for the long term, even if you're buying the broad market.

One could pick apart these words ad absurdam, and then what is the point of having any categories at all?
You could prospect for gold because you heard there might be deposits in the hills and start digging randomly.
A farmer can buy seeds from a reputable source and plant them on the land he knows well.
You can buy a stock for a company you don't really believe in, but you like the way the patterns of activity look.
You can buy the broad market.
You can have a 100% treasury portfolio.
There is a spectrum of risk-taking here, even if we don't want to strictly put each one into investing or speculating. It's very clear. To turn around and say that every choice is based on some kind of analysis, well- is not saying very much of anything.

Caveats about past performance notwithstanding, you can know something about stock market investing, decide if you want to take risk in the market, and *invest* in the broad market. If you say that is the real speculation because you haven't studied the 3,000+ companies, then I don't know what "investing" is. But I would definitely say yours is a false premise.
It made more sense in my head. Maybe it is more of a semantic argument. Personally I "invest" mostly in the sense that Harry Browne was using, even if I think about it with different concepts.

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 3:46 pm
by Kbg
If the readers aren't bored, post away on the current topic. However, this one seems to be getting way in the marginalia and I'm bored. ^-^

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 9:56 pm
by boglerdude
The world is gray, these categories blend.

Investing (eg Buffett): Studying a company and being ~80% sure it will profitable. You have all the information. Safe bets. Good ideas get funded and everyone wins. You cant be Buffett because he has a seat in all the boardrooms.

pseudo-investing (eg Dalio, Asness): You have a lot of information and advantages over others, eg inside sources in China, but are taking large risks and aren't always creating social good. Some say Dalio just made a huge bet on leveraged treasuries in the 80s and the rest is a cool story bro.

Speculation (technicals, day trading): No information advantage. Zero-sum game like poker or chess. You at a table with a few other guys, all looking at the same chart of historical price movement in a stock. Can you make money? Well, someone has to win, how much is luck or "skill." Does it benefit society? No. Is it fun? Yes. Are you allowed to have fun? Yes.
https://xkcd.com/2101/

I agree with Cullen we're savings allocaters. Markets do a sufficient job of deciding what companies are worth - relative to each other. Decide your risk tolerance and buy global cap weighted stocks, and diversified bonds/cash. To paraphrase Asness, I "sin a little" with my pet theories about global Japanification

pmward, I'm mostly trollin :) It might be interesting if you included how much youre betting on these "breakouts" etc so we can track progress.

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2019 11:07 am
by pmward
boglerdude wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 9:56 pm
pmward, I'm mostly trollin :) It might be interesting if you included how much youre betting on these "breakouts" etc so we can track progress.
That would give away the secret sauce, haha. There's one thing that is more important than the bet, and that is risk management. That can involves setting strategies and rules like how much to allocate as a minimum and maximum, how to scale in, how to scale out, how to sell at a gain, how to cut a loss short, etc. With my risk management rules I only have to be right on about one out of every 4 trades to make money because I cut my losses and move on quickly, and give my winners room to run (while keeping them on a leash with stop loss so I don't turn a winner into a loser). I also keep my VP set to 20% of my portfolio value and never, ever, under any circumstance allocate more than 10% of my portfolio value to any individual bet (and even that high usually requires a scale in where I've already made a bunch and am just trying to continue to chase the momentum). As we speak today, only 5% of my portfolio is allocated to speculative positions. The market is very hard to read right now, and very volatile, so I'm treading cautiously. Though I really like what I'm seeing in small cap value, and if that continues to rip I'll definitely keep scaling in as I think that this could potentially be a big macro shift akin to gold's breakout a couple months ago (that I also pounded the table here about for months in advance, while everyone here sounded like they were giving a eulogy at a funeral every time they spoke about gold). I've got a good gain out of it right now, I've already made 2 scaled purchases into SCV. I like adding onto winners, generally my best trades historically have been when I've continued to scale into a trade that was already going in my favor, while raising my stop all the while to stay safe. What is hard is finding that initial trade that goes in my favor, so my initial purchase is always small, to get a feel for the market and allow me a quick exit with minimal losses if I'm wrong. If I catch a winner, and the wind looks to be at my back, from there it's easy to scale in and just kind of let the wind carry me.

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2019 8:16 am
by sophie
That still sounds like market timing to me, pmward, whatever you decide you want to call it (quantitative, risk management etc).

I haven't done due diligence on the thousands of companies whose stock I own indirectly via mutual funds or ETFs. That doesn't make me a bad investor, because being able to predict future performance of these companies is NOT my goal. My goal is to profit broadly from the economic gains made by the stock market system as a whole. When the system is underperforming, I've got the other PP assets to protect my nest egg.

The Cliff's Notes version of whether you can successfully predict a stock's performance without insider information: YOU CAN'T. Happily, I don't have to explain because Harry Browne already did that in his book "Why the Best-Laid Investment Plans Usually Go Wrong". Highly recommended.

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2019 8:34 am
by dualstow
uh oh, I hope kbg doesn’t get bored. Apparently he’s tied to a chair and this thread is all he’s allowed to watch. O0 Please try to be more entertaining, Sophie.

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2019 8:36 am
by sophie
Sounds awful. Kbg, would you like to go to my 11am meeting for me instead? It'll be hugely entertaining. Sigh.

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2019 9:15 am
by Kbg
sophie wrote:
Tue Sep 17, 2019 8:36 am
Sounds awful. Kbg, would you like to go to my 11am meeting for me instead? It'll be hugely entertaining. Sigh.
Sure, if you will take my 4pm budget review. ;-)

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2019 10:55 am
by pmward
sophie wrote:
Tue Sep 17, 2019 8:16 am
That still sounds like market timing to me, pmward, whatever you decide you want to call it (quantitative, risk management etc).

I haven't done due diligence on the thousands of companies whose stock I own indirectly via mutual funds or ETFs. That doesn't make me a bad investor, because being able to predict future performance of these companies is NOT my goal. My goal is to profit broadly from the economic gains made by the stock market system as a whole. When the system is underperforming, I've got the other PP assets to protect my nest egg.

The Cliff's Notes version of whether you can successfully predict a stock's performance without insider information: YOU CAN'T. Happily, I don't have to explain because Harry Browne already did that in his book "Why the Best-Laid Investment Plans Usually Go Wrong". Highly recommended.
Please, stop trying to act like I'm attacking the way you invest or saying it's not correct. I'm not saying this at all. I'm getting very frustrated with people here assuming that I'm saying things I'm not. You're putting lots of words in my mouth that I have not said. I'm content to agree to disagree on whether or not value can be added in a retail sized account through active means if done properly by someone who is trained and experienced. You don't think this is true, I get it, that's fine, and you're totally entitled to your opinions. Matter of fact, most retail investors are better listening to your advice. However, I personally do not care about anyone's opinion on the matter. My personal experience holds much more weight on the subject than anyone's opinion. My views are not going to budge because of some forum comments by people that have 0 real world experience on the matter. Now please stop talking down to me and recommending that I read books that you know I've already read (matter of fact, the start of this discussion was me and DS talking about Harry's thoughts in that book on the technical strategies he believed actually were relevant). Speculation and the "VP" are core parts of Harry's system, described in depth in the very book you posted. Do you want to try to refute Harry on this matter? I'm not sure how many times I have said that I'm not trying to convert anyone's opinion. At least 3 times in this thread alone. I'm content with having a different opinion to the masses, and I'm also content with the masses having a different opinion to me. I think the way you invest is perfectly fine. There is nothing wrong with it. I think you will succeed in reaching your goals. That being said, why is it that you feel the need to attack and have no tolerance for the way that I invest in the 20% of my portfolio that is my VP? Why does the way I handle my VP matter to you? Why do my views on what the market is going to do have any effect on you? Seriously. It's just words on a page. If you don't share that view, it's fine, just ignore all I say on the subject and continue on as you are.

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2019 11:38 am
by sophie
pmward: forgive my not copying your word salad here....

I had an uncle who thought as you did, that he could predict future stock performance of individual companies. He spent his working career as a Wall Street trader, so he was probably much better positioned to do that than you are. When he retired, he set himself up with a full set of computer screens, tie-in to live stock prices etc so he could keep playing the market. He was as fully convinced that he had all the systems worked out as you are.

He died penniless, after losing his retirement savings in the stock market. Near the end of his life, he had to sell his house and move to a rented apartment. Ironically it may have been fortunate that he developed lung cancer at a relatively young age (~70), after chain smoking for most of his life.

This forum is about not repeating scenarios like this. Unfortunately pmward, your future is a lot more likely to look like my uncle's than like the one the rest of us are setting ourselves up with. To be perfectly honest, you've come to the wrong place for this sort of thing.

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2019 11:49 am
by Xan
If pmward is doing this in a 20% VP, then it doesn't sound like he's heading for destitution, however things may go for him.

pmward, you say that people should just ignore your posts if they disagree with your strategy. "It's just words on a page!" And yet when people disagree with your strategy (this IS a discussion forum, after all) you kind of fly off the handle. Perhaps you could take your own advice?

I don't know that all the technical mumbo-jumbo is necessarily off-topic in a scream room, but in general, folks are doing the PP and frequenting this forum because they don't want to have to deal with all that. And there have been some heavy doses of it here lately.

The most interesting thing, I think, is how pmward enjoys this kind of analysis, believes himself to be good at it (and I'm not disagreeing), and yet STILL has the kind of humility to be 80% PP. I think it's much easier for people to say "I don't want to do that" and end up at the PP, or "I'm bad at that" and end up at the PP. But to say "I'm good at it and I like it and yet I may be very wrong" is pretty impressive.

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2019 12:02 pm
by Cortopassi
pmward,

I have read through Sophie's responses, and none sound like an attack, more like her strong opinion. I don't think she's going to try to convert 100% of your allocation to the pp.

That said, I am 52. Not sure how old you are. I have tried it all, day trading, options, spreads, covered calls, passive (but overweight, like 100% on stocks), technicals, fundamentals, mining stocks, gold, silver, a couple newsletters, tips from friends (worst idea ever), stop losses, risk management, you name it.

Burned by every single one. Mainly likely because I was too emotional, not because the system was necessarily bad.

As I've grown older and more concerned about having enough money for the rest of my life, I have found nothing that let's me rest easy more than the pp. I am steering my kids into doing it (my older daughter opened a Roth IRA last month and it is 25/25/25/25) because I know they have zero interest in the mechanics of investing.

I say go for it, if you enjoy it. I did, at times. But mainly it generated stress. I had too many heart palpitations over the years when you wake up and hear something in the world or economy or earnings report just destroyed any gains you had and blew through your stop loss because it gapped down at the open! Then you have to hold the POS stock waiting to break back even, or average down (another worst idea ever, at least for me).

Everything conspired for a long time to make it not fun and way too stressful. But I kept at it because I believed I needed to be active to successfully save for retirement. I was wrong!

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2019 3:03 pm
by pmward
Xan wrote:
Tue Sep 17, 2019 11:49 am
If pmward is doing this in a 20% VP, then it doesn't sound like he's heading for destitution, however things may go for him.
Seriously, this! It's 20% of my portfolio. Lest we forget, Harry Browne himself was one of the greatest speculators in history... I think Sophie saying I'm going to retire penniless and broke because of having a 20% VP is beyond ridiculous. Seriously.
Xan wrote:
Tue Sep 17, 2019 11:49 am
The most interesting thing, I think, is how pmward enjoys this kind of analysis, believes himself to be good at it (and I'm not disagreeing), and yet STILL has the kind of humility to be 80% PP. I think it's much easier for people to say "I don't want to do that" and end up at the PP, or "I'm bad at that" and end up at the PP. But to say "I'm good at it and I like it and yet I may be very wrong" is pretty impressive.
Yes I am not infallible. I have had my fair share of losing trades. I also prioritize other things in my life above my brokerage accounts. I also agree 100% with Cortopassi that it is indeed stressful, and that was also a large part in why I limit my trades these days. So having the majority of my money in a PP and having a VP of which I make longer term trend trades (i.e. I'm not doing day trading or even short term swing trading these days) seems pretty reasonable, especially considering I'm only 37 and have an almost 60% savings rate.... I'm far from doomed to dying penniless...
sophie wrote:
Tue Sep 17, 2019 11:38 am
pmward: forgive my not copying your word salad here....

I had an uncle who thought as you did, that he could predict future stock performance of individual companies. He spent his working career as a Wall Street trader, so he was probably much better positioned to do that than you are. When he retired, he set himself up with a full set of computer screens, tie-in to live stock prices etc so he could keep playing the market. He was as fully convinced that he had all the systems worked out as you are.

He died penniless, after losing his retirement savings in the stock market. Near the end of his life, he had to sell his house and move to a rented apartment. Ironically it may have been fortunate that he developed lung cancer at a relatively young age (~70), after chain smoking for most of his life.

This forum is about not repeating scenarios like this. Unfortunately pmward, your future is a lot more likely to look like my uncle's than like the one the rest of us are setting ourselves up with. To be perfectly honest, you've come to the wrong place for this sort of thing.

So why is it not ok for someone to have 80% of their money in a PP, and 20% in a VP that they use to try to chase returns in order to try to reach their goals sooner? Especially since HB himself made his fortune speculating and condoned people having a VP to speculate with? Why is having no VP suddenly the only way deemed correct, and everyone else that does otherwise is doomed to being ostracized on the forum and being doomed to a future life of poverty? Why is someone that has 80% of their funds in a PP in the "wrong place"? This is seriously a joke. Half the active regular users on this forum do some form of active investing. I'm far from the only one. The only options you have are to a) ignore it and move on with your life b) stop coming here c) perform a culling and ban everyone that is not 100 all in PP, which would mean banning half of the active members on this forum. This is seriously a joke... and one that is not very funny.

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2019 3:31 pm
by Xan
pmward, I think things would go much better if you could let things go. You've posted many times walls of text of technical gibberish (at least, that's how it comes across). Some people have pointed out that they don't believe in what you're doing. Why can't you leave it at that? Why can't you "ignore it and move on with your life" as you demand they do?

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2019 4:05 pm
by Smith1776
I'd like to chime in here with a link and perspective.

https://youtu.be/3EzdvkRgToY

That link is to a Yale lecture done by Robert Shiller on efficient markets. Right around the 42 minute mark he talks about technical analysis.

Shiller, tellingly, recalls a story where he presses Burton Malkiel on why A Random Walk Down Wall Street seems to be sorely lacking on sources in his technical analysis chapters. Malkiel claims that "studies" show that technical analysis doesn't work and shoots it down.

It turns out that Malkiel was being rather liberal with how he compiled his data and did a lot of, er, "extrapolation" to come to his conclusions. Shiller later concedes that when you brush aside these unfounded criticisms, he found that technical analysis wasn't quite as unfounded as people had made it out to be.

Not exactly a ringing endorsement for technical analysis, but the idea being perhaps that there's at least something there...

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2019 4:14 pm
by pmward
Xan wrote:
Tue Sep 17, 2019 3:31 pm
pmward, I think things would go much better if you could let things go. You've posted many times walls of text of technical gibberish (at least, that's how it comes across). Some people have pointed out that they don't believe in what you're doing. Why can't you leave it at that? Why can't you "ignore it and move on with your life" as you demand they do?
I have tried to exit this discussion so many times... I've said time and time again that I do not care to debate this, and that I have no interest in trying to change anyone's pre-existing beliefs. I even went so far as to give in and create an isolated thread in the VP forum for any "technical gibberish" last week to compromise. I had "moved on with my life". Then I get quoted by someone up here asking a question. Then I responded to the question I was asked thinking everything had blown over, and the torches and pitchforks come out anew from people I was not responding to. You really do not understand how frustrating this is. I honestly don't even know why I'm even still here... I really enjoyed this forum when I found it last year, and it's sad that in the last week I've been completely ostracized from the forum simply because of stating some "technical gibberish" and views that go against the typical dogma of the board. I thought this forum was a bit more open minded, or at least tolerant of opposing view. Apparently, I was very wrong in that assumption.

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2019 5:00 pm
by Xan
pmward wrote:
Tue Sep 17, 2019 4:14 pm
Xan wrote:
Tue Sep 17, 2019 3:31 pm
pmward, I think things would go much better if you could let things go. You've posted many times walls of text of technical gibberish (at least, that's how it comes across). Some people have pointed out that they don't believe in what you're doing. Why can't you leave it at that? Why can't you "ignore it and move on with your life" as you demand they do?
I have tried to exit this discussion so many times... I've said time and time again that I do not care to debate this, and that I have no interest in trying to change anyone's pre-existing beliefs. I even went so far as to give in and create an isolated thread in the VP forum for any "technical gibberish" last week to compromise. I had "moved on with my life". Then I get quoted by someone up here asking a question. Then I responded to the question I was asked thinking everything had blown over, and the torches and pitchforks come out anew from people I was not responding to. You really do not understand how frustrating this is. I honestly don't even know why I'm even still here... I really enjoyed this forum when I found it last year, and it's sad that in the last week I've been completely ostracized from the forum simply because of stating some "technical gibberish" and views that go against the typical dogma of the board. I thought this forum was a bit more open minded, or at least tolerant of opposing view. Apparently, I was very wrong in that assumption.
You haven't been ostracized, you're certainly free to hold your opinion, and there are folks here who agree with you. Just don't take everything so personally. Really, go for a nice walk or something.

Fundamentally, you're on a forum primarily for people who explicitly want to avoid what you're talking about. You have to expect a little friction, no?

Re: Stock scream room

Posted: Wed Sep 18, 2019 1:05 am
by boglerdude
PP drama xD

20% VP means you keep adding to it if it goes down. Go ahead and gamble, just call it gambling. Some poker players are better than others right

What Browne, Shiller etc think is just appeal to authority.

We cant all get PhDs in technical analysis and make money because its zero sum. Unless youre acting on economic news before the other players get it, and even that is dubious.