Search results

Yes, sorry, that is exactly what I meant. Assets=Liabilities+Owner's Equity.

There's no change in assets either if debt is used for a buyback. Debt is an asset. The only legitimate reason why a company might use debt for a buyback is if they feel the stock is underpriced and they want to "appease" shareholders. It generally also means that a company sees fewer growth...

What??...The market is correlated with itself...:eek: jk:D

It doesn't matter when you put the creamer in. Both the coffee and the creamer will change temperature the same sitting, whether separate or combined. So, adding it now or after the meeting won't make one difference. Can I have the job? :D

Not to pick on you stocktrad3r, but I'd just like to point out the performance of the stocks I mentioned on the 19th of last month that you said didn't move, FACE and NDN. FACE is up over 8% since that day. NDN took a dip and is up 16.4% over the last 7 trading days. :cool: I'm just...

Oh, also, that movement was more like just under 3 standard deviations. I don't know where the hell those guys at the fund got "25 standard deviations" from or what they could possibly be comparing that against. But what they aren't comparing it against is the actual market volatility.

100,000 years?...haha...yeah right. I just did some statistics on this myself. Using the SPY as a benchmark over the last 20 years, the standard deviation from one month's high to the previous month's low has a standard deviation of roughly 4.6%. Now the SPY moved about 12% to the August low...

Forgot to post the P/L.

A successful week. Light trading this week as my schedule has been very very busy and not allowing me to study the markets as much as I should. The good news though is that I believe my strategy has "substance". We'll see how it pans out in the long run though. I want to add a few more...

Actually, there was transparency in Enron, people just chose not to look there. Enron "schooled" their balance sheets and income statements. The cash flow statements on the other hand told the truth. Nobody should have been fooled by Enron. It was out of pure irrationality and laziness that...

Here's the point where you probably should have shorted CROX.

Overall, I'm quite happy with my decisions this week. I've modified my system to account for volatility and to take the "rigidness" out of it a bit. Next goal is to improve automation and develop a backtesting system. My profits this week were 26.73. Don't laugh...I'm being very...

Nope, you're completely wrong. You need to study portfolio theory. You can actually maximize your returns through diversification with stocks that are not so highly correlated. By removing correlation between stocks, you can actually have a higher rate of return and lower risk. You for the...

well I'm no "bear", but I can tell you one thing, if his entire portfolio is in the stocks he mentioned, he's a fool that will suffer a large drawdown eventually.

That combination also gets crushed with the market. Look at Google. What does Google do really besides sell advertising? Sure, Google tries to move into other products, but the vast majority of their revenue is tied to advertising dollars which requires a good economy. If and when the economy...

You sound eerily like Cramer with a statement like that. You can't separate a "good" company from the "value" of its stock if investing. You are a buy and hold trader, which means you are an investor. If you're an investor, then you should be looking for companies that aren't virtually 100%...

Some really bad trades this week, the fed cut killed my shorts: 9-17 Covered half of RHT for 2.6% gain Covered rest of BBY for .6% lost Covered half of TXI for 2.7% gain (papertrade) 9-18 Covered rest of KBH for 9.6% lost Sold rest of ESIO for 6% gain (papertrade) 9-19 Covered...

Well those picks aren't bad as an asset class of your portfolio, but if investing, that shouldn't be your entire portfolio. The majority of those stocks are highly correlated which means that they all could just as easily swing 20% to the downside. I would suggest maybe one or two more...

Economies don't grow without resources, capital (whether monetary or fixed assets) and free market systems. The majority of the world has none of those 3. The US won't be exporting in large doses anytime in the near future.

and over 50% of the world's wealth is in the US, so what's your point?