~10% of those are rolling down already, some even half way through, say e.g $PRLB.
Last edited:
More people lost money waiting for correction
- Thread starter qlai
- Start date
Correct 50% seen that at some point, but forgot to correct it. The rest stands - especially about guessing right up or down.
Long or short. Do you only trade one direction? Really?
Buy and Hold: A long term trend following strategy with no risk control.
I don't disagree if your time frame is long enough and you can stand the roller coaster ride. As a trader I believe there are more efficient way of taking advantage of the opportunities the market presents us.
At least you admit you were wrong.
No I don't and you are missing my point completely while you threw out a different argument.
Any asset generally has a floor at 0 while the upside is generally unlimited. It is a dumb idea to be a dedicated short.
Incorrect ... anyway who's a dedicated short?
Heard on Real Vision of a guy who had a fund made purely of shorts. 400 positions or so (all fundamental garbage, fake google maps headquarters in the middle of desert etc.) & sometimes wouldn't cover till it went 400%-500% against him.
Don't know the track record tho, might be just sweat talk.
(don't watch the channel anymore either)
Laughs. ,,Dedicated Short''.
Sounds like someone from those jokes :
,,A dedicated short & TSLA walks into a bar''
the point of the OP’s video is that you have to be able to ride the roller coaster.
Rinse and repeat you post this crap every year. Every asset class in NOT in a bubble. I can easily find energy stocks that are still down considerably from even just a couple of years ago. I can find miners that are a half or less of the price they were the last time precious metals were at these levels.
You constantly use the bottom of the deepest corrections as a reference point. It's about the worst reference point you could ever look at, the price a stock went to when weak hands were bailing in a panic. BMO at $56 Cdn for example. It's $115 now. The old value pre-Covid was $104. $104 is a good reference point. $56 is a stupid reference point it'll never see that stock price again. I recommended it last March at $60 with a 7%+ yield. You were too busy talking about how the SPX was going to 1000 or 1500 to notice. And it's also listed on NYSE so that's no excuse.
I heard today that retail sales in the US are already at an all time high, that the recession was over months ago ( but note that many investors took an extra two years in 2009-2011 to realize it was over ) . The expectation was presented that later this year the SPX earnings will be at an ATH. Given that markets are forward looking, it's not a surprise really that the SPX is at an all time high. Just a matter of finding where it should be considering GDP may grow 6-10% this year. Granted when you believe the SPX should be at a P/E of 3-5 all the time you will forever be hopeless at forecasting the SPX.
I could be you and say why would anybody buy BMO at $115 when it was $56 a year ago, when it reality the key notes are it went from roughly $95-100 to $115 over two years and that's not a big move for a company in an oligopoly with rising earnings. Would I buy it at $115 ? Probably not, but if it drops 10% at some point it's a good buy for conservative money.
%%
Good points.
I seldom pay attention to cnbc or subjective stuff like ''bubbles'' .
SEPT sells .....is such a common pattern i may help the bears a bit...............................................................CNBC charts look like they were drawn by kids/LOL good way to save money,maybe
,
Last edited: