I would expect that there would be a rule in the prospectus which says that once the fund has lost (say) 40% it will stop trading and will be wound up.
freealways
freealways
Niederhoffer new book
- Thread starter richtrader
- Start date
Quote from Avalanche:
FWIW Niederhoffer on CNBC next 5 min.
With all due respect to his "financial genius" , is this guy autistic?Or maybe just eccentric?Anyone see the interview?
Dustin Hoffman would do a good Niederhoffer.
LOL. Wow hope his new book is better than that interview was.
Anyone watch it....he just got up and left as the Sue was trying to close the segment and segway into the break.
I didn't get whether he thinks mkt is long here or short either just that I should do the opposite of the crowd.
Anyone watch it....he just got up and left as the Sue was trying to close the segment and segway into the break.
I didn't get whether he thinks mkt is long here or short either just that I should do the opposite of the crowd.
Avalanche says : "I didn't get whether he thinks market is long here or short either, just that I should do the opposite of the crowd."
There is absolutely nothing wrong with that bit of wisdom. The only missing part is 'how to get the timing right'.
So how does one go about it to know that a particular move is the beginning of a trend rather than a mere temporary retracement (or for that matter that there will be considerable delay for the move to eventuate) ?
Neither would he know the correct timing, so hence his reason for adding to an, at that moment in time losing, position.
That is undoubtedly the correct thing to do ......................unless of course the expected move either doesn't eventuate or else is (too) much delayed.
The problem starts when a number of such positions don't quite work out.
Alltogether it different game to the one most of us play.
freealways
There is absolutely nothing wrong with that bit of wisdom. The only missing part is 'how to get the timing right'.
So how does one go about it to know that a particular move is the beginning of a trend rather than a mere temporary retracement (or for that matter that there will be considerable delay for the move to eventuate) ?
Neither would he know the correct timing, so hence his reason for adding to an, at that moment in time losing, position.
That is undoubtedly the correct thing to do ......................unless of course the expected move either doesn't eventuate or else is (too) much delayed.
The problem starts when a number of such positions don't quite work out.
Alltogether it different game to the one most of us play.
freealways
Niederhoffer...... that dude is wack man!!! I just caught the end of the CNBC piece. The guy is definitely out there, I was laughing my ass off at the end when he just got up and started walking off the set.
I hope they have the guy back more often just for the entertainment value. Could you imagine giving this guy a few million bucks of yours to play with. :eek:
I hope they have the guy back more often just for the entertainment value. Could you imagine giving this guy a few million bucks of yours to play with. :eek:
I saw him too. WOW!!!! That guy is unbelievable. I have known some quants in my time, but none who were such a close emulation of "rain man" himself.
I have great respect for Vic's accomplishments over the years. His blowup was clearly a mistake, but the long term record is an outstanding accomplishment.
I have to say he is even more eccentric in person than I had read. He couldn't seem to keep it together for the entire interview. I have never seen anyone just walk off the set like that!!!
I wasn't exactly impressed with his 100 year timeframe. His early point was: "Well, over the last 100 years, commodities are down 95% (adjusted for wages) and stocks are up 1,500,000%, so which should you buy? that which is depressed or that which has had it's run?"
Then at the end he says "Buy and hold has always been the best thing for the public."
Too funny.
I have great respect for Vic's accomplishments over the years. His blowup was clearly a mistake, but the long term record is an outstanding accomplishment.
I have to say he is even more eccentric in person than I had read. He couldn't seem to keep it together for the entire interview. I have never seen anyone just walk off the set like that!!!
I wasn't exactly impressed with his 100 year timeframe. His early point was: "Well, over the last 100 years, commodities are down 95% (adjusted for wages) and stocks are up 1,500,000%, so which should you buy? that which is depressed or that which has had it's run?"
Then at the end he says "Buy and hold has always been the best thing for the public."
Too funny.