Search results

Interesting. The consensus appears to be short term glut (2014-15) with lots of new mines coming on stream, but longer term shortage as the largest mines decline. But the expected supply may not show up this year or next. Nobody really knows. The chart looks good if we can get some momentum...

Are there any prop shops that have even $10M of capital?

But the salary is subtracted from the ROI calculation. His time is valuable.

Warren Buffett is an insurance industry executive. His job is to achieve consistent results and preserve capital. That's not a traders job. A trader should be taking advantage of asymmetric risk/reward opportunities. A trader looking to grind out 2%/month is thinking like an old man or somebody...

gld is heading for double digits

can't edit titles.

Register your guesses

2% per month underperformed the market this year. But ET loves the "per month" and "per day" thing, as if trading were a job with a salary.

interview http://www.thestreet.com/markets/marketfeatures/920199.html

A legend.

He was mostly a short seller, which is pretty astonishing - how many wealthy short sellers are there? Hard to find anything to disagree with in this interview: http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/12/why-dont-germans-tweet#disqus_thread "What a lot of rich people do is dump it...

OK see what you're saying. don't think we disagree. making predictions is what traders do. volume can help. but volume at highs and lows is not symmetrical. volume should move price. if it doesn't, at low it's bullish. at high, bearish. pure price action traders are missing out on valuable...

what does that even mean, RN? Really. Enough of the zen bs. What are you going to do as a trader if not focus on probabilities of future price movement?

I'd agree with you about both charts. The KMP chart is directionless, and the increased volume looks to me like big sellers are dribbling out shares. The NCQ is an index rebalance. I expect the stock to pop back up to $2, I own shares.

Was I getting on your case? That was your argument, right?

So now you're an expert on volume patterns? What happened to "it's the price, stupid"?

Are buying and selling symmetrical? Buyers assume risk of loss. Stocks can collapse in an absence of buyers, but will not go up in an absence of sellers. Buyers will not pay any price, but sellers may be willing to sell at any price.

is one bar enough? takes more than one bar to form a pattern. is there any bottoming pattern that suggests incremental supply/demand is coming from buyers?

the first chart is an example of sideways price action, with high volume. the question is how the high level of volume is to be interpreted relative to the price action.

why not post a diary here and when your success is plain to see, people will be throwing money at you.