Kudos to MMs
- Thread starter nitro
- Start date
I am adding a final computation to FV. I will do it in such a way so that it calibrates closely to what I have seen in the last few months. There is logic in the addition, but the equation is something I am guessing at. I will post the last "FV" and the new "FV" to compare how much different they are. One thing, it will have a day or week where it may oscillate wildly, and then settle down.
I feel like I may be adding "Epicycles on epicycles"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deferent_and_epicycle
to a possibly not dynamic enough infrastructure. I may be operating under the equivalent assumption that "the earth is the center of the universe."
Still, it is a cheap addition that would have gotten me all the gains, and would have kept me out of 90% of the loses.
I feel like I may be adding "Epicycles on epicycles"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deferent_and_epicycle
to a possibly not dynamic enough infrastructure. I may be operating under the equivalent assumption that "the earth is the center of the universe."
Still, it is a cheap addition that would have gotten me all the gains, and would have kept me out of 90% of the loses.
I suggest a -1 multiplier. Nothing makes sense to you? Well, my criticism from 2-3 or whatever years ago still stands, you are trying to make gold out of bronze. Your idea is FUNDAMENTALLY flawed, and you are STILL not getting it.
You are the ultimate market alchemist. In fact, you are more dangerous than Jack Hershey, because with him at least one can figure out that one is dealing with a lunatic right away.
With you it takes a while, and in the process one can lose lots of money. I am sure you are meaning well, but there is a saying that well meaning idiots are still idiots. (or something like that)
The most scary part is that a year or so ago you were talking about backers, people who are willing to lose money to your madness.
And I am telling this as a friend telling to an alcoholic, stop drinking. There is NO SUCH A THING as Fair Value, a thing that magically tells you where the market is headed, and specially not all the time.
So my friend, stop drinking the cool aid, get into AA, and give the fuck up already....*
* or just reverse the strategy, since it is a consistent loser
Quote from Pekelo:
I suggest a -1 multiplier. Nothing makes sense to you? Well, my criticism from 2-3 or whatever years ago still stands, you are trying to make gold out of bronze. Your idea is FUNDAMENTALLY flawed, and you are STILL not getting it.
You are the ultimate market alchemist. In fact, you are more dangerous than Jack Hershey, because with him at least one can figure out that one is dealing with a lunatic right away.
With you it takes a while, and in the process one can lose lots of money. I am sure you are meaning well, but there is a saying that well meaning idiots are still idiots. (or something like that)
The most scary part is that a year or so ago you were talking about backers, people who are willing to lose money to your madness.
And I am telling this as a friend telling to an alcoholic, stop drinking. There is NO SUCH A THING as Fair Value, a thing that magically tells you where the market is headed, and specially not all the time.
So my friend, stop drinking the cool aid, get into AA, and give the fuck up already....*
* or just reverse the strategy, since it is a consistent loser
That's pretty cruel.
What I think Nitro's problem is, is that he doesn't actually understand what his model is telling him. Look, all models are a form of a security blanket. We use them to have the courage to make decisions that we intuitively know we should make. The problem with Nitro is I think he doesn't understand his model and it seems to contradict often what he actually is feeling intuitively. This is a big problem. If there ever is such thing as a grail it's creating a model that simply replicates what one already knows to be right in the first place. And Nitro doesn't appear to have that yet.
Oh yeah and forgot to repeat, but I already said so:
You are playing TECHNICALS when the market followes and reacts to FUNDAMENTALS right now...
Well, it has the wrong title and it is under the wrong section (it is a journal), so don't blame yourself.
It is somehow strangely addictive, just like Surf's. I guess people go to Nascar for the crashes, not for watching them to make left turns...
---------------------------------------
Oh yeah, one more thing. In the last year FV (version 4 or so) had been consistently under the market by 100 or so points. Maybe we should bring back that version and try, sounds like a winner....
You are playing TECHNICALS when the market followes and reacts to FUNDAMENTALS right now...
Well, it has the wrong title and it is under the wrong section (it is a journal), so don't blame yourself.
It is somehow strangely addictive, just like Surf's. I guess people go to Nascar for the crashes, not for watching them to make left turns...
---------------------------------------
Oh yeah, one more thing. In the last year FV (version 4 or so) had been consistently under the market by 100 or so points. Maybe we should bring back that version and try, sounds like a winner....
I actually thought Nitro's model was a "fundamental" model, not a technical one. I'm not even sure there are any technical inputs in his model. That maybe part of the problem.