Unbelievable but true: CFTC declares Technical Analysys as FRAUD :D!!!

ktm · Jun 9, 2003

Quote from dougcs:

Sayeth the Sage of Omaha aka Warren Buffet:

"I'd be a bum in the street with a tin cup if the markets were efficient."

Yes he has said as much. I also agree with Warren and the CFTC when they say it is a bunch of bunk. Warren thinks TA is a joke, and he's right. Do you think he buys into support? The guy may have never seen a chart in his life.

This is like an Amway convention pushing this stuff. Sure lots of people have made money as they get higher on the pyramid. The TA folks help the rest of us make because they are like lemmings with this stuff, very predictable. Everything becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

FinStat · Jun 9, 2003

are markets truly effecient........it would seem not.

is most TA a load of bunk.......it would seem so.

Analysis of price/time would seem to be very useful. however, most 'indicators' have zero predictive power.

FishSauce · Jun 9, 2003

Pretty good trend so far.

I just wanted to add:

More people using TA <b>weakens</b> its efficacy NOT enhanced. You want people NOT to use TA.

---Fish

jbtrader23 · Jun 9, 2003

It's no big suprise. Every now and then some big shot comes out and says TA is nothing but glorified tea leave readings, while others (myself included) absolutely believe the markets are inefficient.

Warren Buffet, George Soros and the like are not the luckiest men in the world as academia would have you believe. Staying lucky for 30+ years?

If the markets are truely "efficient" why were JDSU, QCOM and the Nazzdogs of the bubble years trading at 500+ times earnings? That's efficiency? I'd hate to think what inefficiency would have been!!

marketsurfer · Jun 9, 2003

Quote from Scientist:

HAAAHAAAHAAAHAAAHAHAAAAAAH!

ROFLBMAO

Haven't laughed this hard for a while....

It's like - No, it's PURE COINCIDENCE that even the SPX & COMPQ most of the time follow EXACTLY the regression channels, trendlines, bollinger bands, let's not even mention MA's - Just to name a few simple indicators.

Hey folks, I'm talking about the BACKBONE of the WORLD economy here! Even every single institution on earth follows those TI's - Are those clowns mad?

TA, properly used, is more than 90% precise. Not because it works - But because everybody uses it. Simple as that.

I'm still laughing. Let's hope it fools a few traders and makes them act on fundy's -

~Scientist

LOL ! ever think bollinger bands, MA's, regression channels, etc. follow the SPX and COMPX ?? it's not the other way around . in addition, your 90% precise statement is false.

FinStat · Jun 9, 2003

TA, properly used, is more than 90% precise. Not because it works - But because everybody uses it. Simple as that.

I'm still laughing. Let's hope it fools a few traders and makes them act on fundy's -

~Scientist

how did you arrive at 90% ???? data, process??????

Jordan · Jun 9, 2003

Quote from marketsurfer:

LOL ! ever think bollinger bands, MA's, regression channels, etc. follow the SPX and COMPX ?? it's not the other way around . in addition, your 90% precise statement is false.

And when price pulls back to a popularly followed average, finds support, and rallies... is this the average following price?

No.

stock777 · Jun 9, 2003

Quote from aphexcoil:

They're currently teaching us in school that stock price movements follow a Markov process -- where the next movement is an independent process free of any movement that was made prior.

In some ways, I'd have to agree -- in other ways, I'd have to disagree.

As far as second to second movements go, I don't think there could be any indication of what will happen next -- since a big sell order could be coming from NYC at t+10 seconds and an even larger buy order could be coming from Chicago at t+13 seconds. Multiply this chaos by tens of thousands of active traders, and you really have no idea what is in the pipeline.

Be careful , paying too much attn to the stuff they 'teach ' you could be fatal. Ask the teach how his 401k/2 is doing.

Granted, there is considerable randomness and 'noise', in the market, but someone , somewhere has more information than you and the public at large. If nothing else, the t+13 guy in Chicago knew he was in the pipe, and may or may not have waited, goosed the price down, or participated in some other way and affected the game, prior to his entering the large buy.

Almost everything in the world is random to an ant, and profs that don't get it.

ROCK SOLID · Jun 9, 2003

Quote from jbtrader23:

If the markets are truely "efficient" why were JDSU, QCOM and the Nazzdogs of the bubble years trading at 500+ times earnings? That's efficiency? I'd hate to think what inefficiency would have been!!

good example, dude...

and the same thing happens on smaller time frames..

dbphoenix · Jun 10, 2003

Quote from Jordan:

And when price pulls back to a popularly followed average, finds support, and rallies... is this the average following price?

No.

If it were to do it consistently, you might have a point. But it never does. Ditto with Fib, etc.