Search results

Spoken like a true populist twit lacking an ounce of common sense. You and your ilk are a politician's wet dream...

I disagree for the same reason that entrapment is illegal. The dipsticks in Washington are the ones that should, but will never hang for creating this horror show...

It's already given back 70% of that gain the past 3 days. What are you waiting for, to break the $37.82 swing low?

Add to that the fact that ETFs have to distribute gains annually. Worst case would be to buy more shares with the distributed gains then get hammered in the following year. The net, due to additional shares, is an amplified down move.

If you're sensible enough to buy FAS at a short-term bottom you would have never bought FAZ near it's short-term top.

The leaders in a past bull market rarely carry the banner in the next one. Better to find the next industry that's going to get the attention. IMHO, I'm thinking the better bets are going to be plays on water, energy, food and healthcare.

How is a $100 stock that drops $40 any different from a $5 stock that dropped $2?

If you don't care what the criteria are to determine a trend and rank it's quality how are you going to know if someone gave you an intentionally bogus response?

The hell it doesn't. a. a long security position held overnight and sold the next day prior to any new purchase of the same security.

Et tu, eh?

Not quite. While the SEC demanded the exchanges move to decimalized price quotes they only made recommendations on minimum price variation (MPV). The actual MPV value was left up to the exchanges to decide. http://www.sec.gov/rules/other/decimalp.htm

His reply was just as precise as your initial statement that removing the uptick rule was bad. BTW, as far as costs are concerned, that point became moot with the move to decimalization. I guess it's also lost on you that the shear volume of trading today demands a decentralized...

Use the Force, Luke... http://www.google.com/search?q=bypass+uptick+rule

You're equating a position to a buy, which is wrong. While you can only have a single position in a stock it can be composed of several lots. Each lot is created with each separate purchase. The rule clearly states that the position needs to be closed before another purchase is made in...

Hardly. The ones going private can't afford to be public anymore due to the costs of SarBox compliance.

You only have yourself to blame if you didn't trade the trend.

Exactly. http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data

And, apparently, over FINRA's as well. That said, there's really nothing left to discuss here.

The key word is "position," all lots of the same security. In other words, you have to go completely flat in a given stock before making another purchase in order to make the previous day's buys not count against the PDT count.

Not true. Any purchases made over the previous 4 days will count if you don't sell prior to the next buy. Here's the exact text of the rule: FINRA (NASD) Rule 2520. Day Trading Margin Requirements Day Trading (i) The term “day trading” means the purchasing and selling or the...