| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
49473
Jita Trade and Research Institute
   |
Posted - 2010.09.21 19:49:00 -
[31]
Edited by: 49473 on 21/09/2010 19:52:45
 Originally by: Abdiel Kavash
Originally by: 49473
Originally by: Scott McClellan
When do we get the answers?
You'll get the answer by 2010.09.21 19:26:00.
Hm?
I apologise.
The actual "real" price chart was chart B, and it was unsuprisingly Ferrogel. The rest were random walks.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.09.21 20:16:00 -
[32]
I suggest the next time you use bars or dots. Due to using a continuous and smoothed line, the Ferrogel in game graph gives a vastly superior feedback than the PDF one.
The following important features are thus barely visible or shifted:
- Distribution at 50k
- Retracement at 27.5k
- Major retracement at 20k
- Data from 1 Jun is visibly different vs the graph in game. In game there's a continuation flat-tish downtrend, in the PDF there's a bounce up past 239.
-
Auditing & consulting
When looking for investors, please read
http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h + http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
49473
Jita Trade and Research Institute
|
Posted - 2010.09.21 20:23:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
I suggest the next time you use bars or dots. Due to using a continuous and smoothed line, the Ferrogel in game graph gives a vastly superior feedback than the PDF one.
The following important features are thus barely visible or shifted:
- Distribution at 50k
- Retracement at 27.5k
- Major retracement at 20k
- Data from 1 Jun is visibly different vs the graph in game. In game there's a continuation flat-tish downtrend, in the PDF there's a bounce up past 239.
If I do another, which is likely but not likely in the near future I will bear this all in mind. As I've said several times, it's a bit of fun and as such was not as rigorous as it should have been.
|
AnakieNine
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 00:40:00 -
[34]
Originally by: AnakieNine
The correct one is B.
100% sure. The rest of you are losers.
Do i get a prize 
Just kidding.
|
oil
Double-L
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 03:37:00 -
[35]
where is mah price?
|
Ave Volta
Perkone
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 05:08:00 -
[36]
By what method can the correct answer be consistently reached in this senario?
An exercise such as this will be vastly more interesting to most people if you provide them with the chance to learn from the problem.
--------------------------------
chown -R us:us /yourbase |
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 13:36:00 -
[37]
Edited by: Claire Voyant on 22/09/2010 13:44:00
Originally by: Ave Volta
By what method can the correct answer be consistently reached in this senario?
An exercise such as this will be vastly more interesting to most people if you provide them with the chance to learn from the problem.
I assume the point was to show that technical analysts who think they can read the bumps on a chart and foretell future prices change can't even tell the difference between a real price chart and a simplistic randomly generated one.
Now, I am of the opinion that technical analysis is all voodoo mumbo jumbo, but this test was not a fair comparison. He chose a price graph (ferrogel) that could not possibly be representative of anything in the real world because the laws of nature (physics and chemistry) do not change abruptly from one day to the next. (Unless there was a god and that god had a Ph.D. in Economics from an Icelandic university and he believed in an unregulated free-market but didn't see that divine intervention was a form of market intervention.)
Also, because of scaling, the price movements in the last six months were not visible in the real graph he showed. Just look at a graph of Ferrorgel prices over the past six months to see that there was really nothing unusual about it. If all graphs had been done on a log-scale so actual price movements could be seen, it would have been a better test.
Add to this the critiques of the methodology I made above.
Lastly, the fact is that if the test had been done properly it would of failed. That is, the real price graph would have been easily visible in most cases, but not because technical analysis has any basis in reality.
The random walk hypothesis applies to the stock market as a whole (for example a broad index such as the S&P 500) not to an individual stocks and certainly not to a specific commodity in an internet spaceship game where random people can and do manipulate prices on a frequent basis and the laws of supply and demand usually return prices to an equilibrium the rest of the time.
Technical analysis does not fail because the market is a random walk. It fails because it can't predict the future.
Edit: Whoops! Quote:
Dr. Eyj=G was Dean of the Faculty of Business and Science at the University of Akureyri in Iceland, which he joined in 2000 after his studies in the United States. Dr. Eyj=G has a PhD. in Environmental and Resource Economics from the University of Rhode Island and a B.Sc. in Economics from University of Iceland.
|
49473
Jita Trade and Research Institute
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 16:49:00 -
[38]
Edited by: 49473 on 22/09/2010 16:51:20
Originally by: Ave Volta
By what method can the correct answer be consistently reached in this senario?
An exercise such as this will be vastly more interesting to most people if you provide them with the chance to learn from the problem.
The scale of chart means that it seems there can be no consistent method of determining "real" from fake" by viewing alone.
However, if you had the numerical price/volume data, you would easily be able to differentiate using technical analysis.
However you must understand that I didn't actually approach the content of this thread with any set agenda to prove but rather because it was something I'd talked to someone in my corporation about offhand.
I think the most interesting result from my perspective is that modified random walks can provide us with some form of probabilistic risk analysis; because amongst other reasons as you average the random walks together it becomes harder to to distinguish between random and real. There is also an interesting results that occur when you apply fibonacci ratios to maximum and minimum random walks. They are not truly random walks they are a gaussian; where the volatility of the price varies according to normal distribution.
I think the subject is interesting, and if I were to have any intentions about starting this thread it's that people find some enjoyment in it and that they go on to read about these things. I fully admit that my methodology is flawed; so flawed I have just received a 4 page PDF on improvements I could make.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 16:56:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Claire Voyant
Technical analysis does not fail because the market is a random walk. It fails because it can't predict the future.
Why does it fail? Because it does not do what is should not do?
-
Auditing & consulting
When looking for investors, please read
http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h + http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
Frankfasta
Minmatar
Knights Of the Black Sun
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 17:10:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Ave Volta
By what method can the correct answer be consistently reached in this senario?
An exercise such as this will be vastly more interesting to most people if you provide them with the chance to learn from the problem.
Over at the other thread you will find a few more graphs with characteristics that are unlikely to appear in a market/index/share graph. If you have the raw naumbers you can probably have a look at characteristics like variance of certain time frames etc.
Apart from that is a whole branch of economics dedicated to interpreting historic charts to draw conclusions about future developments. That being said... while the future hasnt happened yet every prediction is exactly that, a prediction. Each of those guesses has a certain percentage of becoming reality. There might be people with better guessing track records than others.
I do recall reading some research paper about hardly any managed funds not being able to beat the market index over any prolonged period of time about a year ago.( 10 years, only funds tradeable in germany)
Google turned up something similar on a broader scale http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/13/business/13stra.html?_r=2
I do believe there can be certain patterns detectable in certain markets or situations. But if anybody tells you he can give a good prediction for every single market/share out there, dont throw your money at him ;-)
"Predictions are hard to make, especially about the future". No offense meant.
|
49473
Jita Trade and Research Institute
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 17:13:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Claire Voyant
Edited by: Claire Voyant on 22/09/2010 13:44:00
Originally by: Ave Volta
By what method can the correct answer be consistently reached in this senario?
An exercise such as this will be vastly more interesting to most people if you provide them with the chance to learn from the problem.
I assume the point was to show that technical analysts who think they can read the bumps on a chart and foretell future prices change can't even tell the difference between a real price chart and a simplistic randomly generated one.
Now, I am of the opinion that technical analysis is all voodoo mumbo jumbo, but this test was not a fair comparison. He chose a price graph (ferrogel) that could not possibly be representative of anything in the real world because the laws of nature (physics and chemistry) do not change abruptly from one day to the next. (Unless there was a god and that god had a Ph.D. in Economics from an Icelandic university and he believed in an unregulated free-market but didn't see that divine intervention was a form of market intervention.)
Also, because of scaling, the price movements in the last six months were not visible in the real graph he showed. Just look at a graph of Ferrorgel prices over the past six months to see that there was really nothing unusual about it. If all graphs had been done on a log-scale so actual price movements could be seen, it would have been a better test.
Add to this the critiques of the methodology I made above.
Lastly, the fact is that if the test had been done properly it would of failed. That is, the real price graph would have been easily visible in most cases, but not because technical analysis has any basis in reality.
The random walk hypothesis applies to the stock market as a whole (for example a broad index such as the S&P 500) not to an individual stocks and certainly not to a specific commodity in an internet spaceship game where random people can and do manipulate prices on a frequent basis and the laws of supply and demand usually return prices to an equilibrium the rest of the time.
Technical analysis does not fail because the market is a random walk. It fails because it can't predict the future.
Edit: Whoops! Quote:
Dr. Eyj=G was Dean of the Faculty of Business and Science at the University of Akureyri in Iceland, which he joined in 2000 after his studies in the United States. Dr. Eyj=G has a PhD. in Environmental and Resource Economics from the University of Rhode Island and a B.Sc. in Economics from University of Iceland.
You are incorrect in your assumption of my intentions with this thread, as someone who does limited technical analysis within Eve, I have no such interest in debunking it; although admittedly I don't read the charts much as I have asked people in this thread to do.
There is actually a great deal of empirical evidence to suggest that technical analysis is not "voodoo mumbo jumbo", there is a good book called "A Non-Random Walk Down Wall Street" and I am currently compiling evidence that this is true for Eve online aswell.
You are correct however that this wasn't fair, and in fact are far too kind in your criticism on my "methodology".
The random walk hypothesis doesn't actually only apply to the stock market as a whole it really only says that past price is not relevant to future price; because price are only responses to information that comes in at random. Its proponents have often used indices to attempt to prove their point, however the concept is not limited to indices by definition.
I'd dispute your claim that technical analysis can't predict the future because I have a great deal of success "predicting the future" to a limited extent using technical analysis. I also think that historic market data can be used in a wide range of ways to both maximise profits and minimise potential losses.
|
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 17:27:00 -
[42]
Perfect. 49473 says technical analysis can predict the future, but VV says it "should not" predict the future. I am left scratching my head.
|
49473
Jita Trade and Research Institute
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 17:31:00 -
[43]
Edited by: 49473 on 22/09/2010 17:32:20
Originally by: Claire Voyant
Perfect. 49473 says technical analysis can predict the future, but VV says it "should not" predict the future. I am left scratching my head.
We are not the same person and may potentially have different views.
Some hold the view that TA does not "predict the future" but rather highlights trading opportunities.
|
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 17:48:00 -
[44]
Highlighting trading opportunities in the past is rather obvious and pointless.
|
49473
Jita Trade and Research Institute
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 18:13:00 -
[45]
Edited by: 49473 on 22/09/2010 18:14:10
Originally by: Claire Voyant
Highlighting trading opportunities in the past is rather obvious and pointless.
One of the central assumptions of technical analysis is that historic market behaviour will repeat itself, this means that is does not seem so pointless to look at past trading opportunities to judge future ones.
The difference between us might be that we use "predicting the future" differently, I mean any "prediction about the future" whereas he refers to "specific price predictions".
However he will have to tell you what he thinks the purpose of technical analysis is, but I'm only making an assumption about his view.
|
AnakieNine
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 20:07:00 -
[46]
The problem with forecasting, as well as probability and statistics isn't really math. It's the inability of people to successfully understand when they should and shouldn't use a particular method.
The next thing people fail at, is that they weight the conclusion with their own bias opinions.
Always question every assumption and view the problem from many angles.
Few people do all these things well.
|
Mme Pinkerton
United Engineering Services
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 20:33:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Frankfasta
Apart from that is a whole branch of economics dedicated to interpreting historic data to draw conclusions about future developments.
time-series analysis (as used in economic forecasting) and chart analysis (as used by some traders) are very different beasts.
Originally by: Frankfasta
That being said... while the future hasnt happened yet every prediction is exactly that, a prediction. Each of those guesses has a certain percentage of becoming reality. There might be people with better guessing track records than others.
Which is why a serious forecaster will try to give you an idea of the known uncertainty in his forecast by giving confidence intervals (here's a nice example)
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 21:06:00 -
[48]
Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha on 22/09/2010 21:15:54
Quote:
Perfect. 49473 says technical analysis can predict the future, but VV says it "should not" predict the future. I am left scratching my head.
First of all, there are multiple kinds of analysis (i.e. fundamental, technical) and within them, there are multiple kinds and variations. 49473 uses a certain approach I stopped using 1 year ago because I found out that using numbers and indicators (many based on derivatives resulting off moving averages) to attempt to interpret large human numbers psychology has a very high risk of producing "lagging" models, that is something useless for my interest (short term trading).
All what the so called "naked analysis" does is to accumulate edges.
This happens as follows:
- study basic fundamentals and news. This will give a rough edge about a direction.
- study basic demand and offer recurring patterns. There's always wholesale vs retail, demand vs offer, market makers and market players. There's always human psychology and "slack", where end users but also banks will prefer interacting at round-ish numbers. These interactions may or may not reflect on a chart, in the form of more or less reliable patterns.
- some of the above have "must follow" consequences. I.e. a bank setting up large buy orders at 1.300 (usually spanning a whole futures contract duration aka 4 months) will cause strong reactions whenever price comes close to that number. A technical analyst will know that at 1300 there's "something" because the graph will show strong price action in multiple days / weeks always at 1300, this is how pivot lines born.
- with some experience, an analyst will be able to put all of those edges together and form a probabilistic model where price could go by path of least resistance. Usually 1-4 different low resistance outcomes are possible.
At this point, naked analysis is over. The rest is called money / position management. The trader will follow price action for signs about which of the N paths of low resistance has been chosen (sometimes just an important news could cause a path to be taken). Once price seems to have taken a path, AFTER price has taken a path (therefore there is NO vodoo prediction), the trader will open a position with a protective "stop loss" in case the choice results being wrong.
Regardless whether a win or a loss is scored, an anti-martingale system will be used in order to maximize wallet increase or minimize the impact of a loss.
The sum of the above is a sum of "edges" pushing the probability of gain to > 50% (coin toss). This is how traders for a living make money.
So, for the bits I and many others know and use, analysis is not a future scrying tool but just a tool to organize practical bits and history into a semi-coherent plan with some alternative possible outcomes. Then analysis ends. The rest is "just" trading, looking at what oucome was the right one (if an unexpected solution will happen, in that case the trade won't even start happen or will be a loser anyway) and money + risk management.
-
Auditing & consulting
When looking for investors, please read
http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h + http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
Frankfasta
Minmatar
Knights Of the Black Sun
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 21:34:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Mme Pinkerton
Originally by: Frankfasta
data
time-series analysis (as used in economic forecasting) and chart analysis (as used by some traders) are very different beasts.
Data is data, no matter if its shown in a graph or a table. Your statement is still true, of course.
Originally by: Mme Pinkerton
Which is why a serious forecaster will try to give you an idea of the known uncertainty in his forecast by giving confidence intervals (here's a nice example)
A confidence interval needs a statistical test, if Im not mistaken that "chart reading"-technique (is it called technical analysis? if so, why?) cannot provide this.
Btw do you happen to know any time-series methods that are used in economic settings and could point me in their direction?
Thanks!
|
49473
Jita Trade and Research Institute
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 22:07:00 -
[50]
Ferrogel
It should be noted that technical analysis is but one of the methods I use, actual time devoted TA is probably less than 5% of my market analysis and development of tools applicable to Eve time.
I am enjoying listening to your discussion however, please do continue.
|
Mme Pinkerton
United Engineering Services
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 23:05:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Frankfasta
Btw do you happen to know any time-series methods that are used in economic settings and could point me in their direction?
Sadly I don't know much about time-series analysis, but a few starting points:
Time-series analysis belongs in the field of econometrics; the core idea is to extract trends, cycles and residuals from a given time-series. The methodological approach is to test whether the given data contains meaningful autoregressions and to identify these.
You can then go on to try and identify causal relationships between the different variables and combine this (in its pure form only statistical) approach with more or less detailed assumptions about the underlying economic model.
You use the insight from the econometric analysis to refine your models and you use the models to supplement/enable a meaningful statistical analysis.
I only had a very basic course about time-series analysis, the methods we discussed were ARMA, ARIMA, unit root tests and vector autoregressive systems.
Some of the tools used in technical analysis would probably fall under the definition of "time-series analysis" - the main difference imo is that an econometric forecast uses the statistical tools in conjunction with economical models. Identifying some pattern can only be the very first step (explorative analysis) - the second step has to be to explain this pattern with a model-based approach and use the so-gained model knowledge to extract the pattern more clearly from the rest of the data (and so on...). Only the integration of purely statistical methods with decent models allows you to make forecasts in the presence of changing external circumstances.
Also important to know is that published economic forecasts are not the result of one "master" model but an interpolation of the results of many different models featuring different theoretical and empirical approaches - this is done to reduce the quirks introduced by the peculiarities of any one specific analytical method/underlying model (and if the models wildly disagree you are back to manual fine-tuning  ).
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.09.23 00:19:00 -
[52]
Quote:
Also important to know is that published economic forecasts are not the result of one "master" model but an interpolation of the results of many different models featuring different theoretical and empirical approaches - this is done to reduce the quirks introduced by the peculiarities of any one specific analytical method/underlying model (and if the models wildly disagree you are back to manual fine-tuning
"Technical analysis is an art" - you may find this statement by several authors.
I found out a nice place to see a nice intro everyone can afford to understand: Linkage
While I don't agree with some of the statements listed there (after all I follow a sub-branch of TA and don't pretend to predict anything):
"Technical analysts consider the market to be 80% psychological and 20% logical"
"Prices Movements are not Totally Random"
"What" is More Important than "Why"
A corollary of the above is that there are consistently profitable traders using approximate TA giving them "good enough" pointers while there have been giant "brains" funds failures a la LTCM where having hired 2 Nobel Prize Economists did not serve saving them from ruin.
This is also why mechanical / "AI" bots tend to underperform.
If markets were something that Someone With More Powerful computer or algorythm could easily tame, we'd have seen a rush at implementing those solutions and the numbers of winners would quickly reduce wins profitability to "don't bother" levels. It's not so, therefore mechanical, scientifical or whatever name approach DOES NOT WORK well enough.
-
Auditing & consulting
When looking for investors, please read
http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h + http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
RaWBLooD
|
Posted - 2010.09.23 07:47:00 -
[53]
Edited by: RaWBLooD on 23/09/2010 07:51:29
Nice thread. I will be looking forward to your newsletters.
miners-you can: switch, rob, wardec, nerf, scam them, buy below market, pirate them on their way to sell. mining < trading, ratting, manufacturing from market bought minerals,they still wont go away
|
Mme Pinkerton
United Engineering Services
|
Posted - 2010.09.23 08:05:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
"Technical analysis is an art" - you may find this statement by several authors.
That's exactly the kind of statement which leads to "voodoo" comments (although I have heard the same sentence aimed at integral calculus which can hardly be said to be voodoo  ).
A few random thoughts to be added to my post above:
I don't like that TA seems to be a completely univariate analysis. If I want to predict tomorrow's GDP, I don't only use today's and yesterday's GDP in my analysis but also data on unemployment, consumer spending, business confidence, ...
I know that some of this data runs ahead or lags behind the composite GDP value and I can use this knowledge to improve my projections.
Now you will say "but we're talking about the extremely short term here, industry trends and that stuff doesn't matter".
[pipe dream]To which my answer is: All trade-able assets in roughly the same category of risk are basically imperfect substitutes. I don't have any numbers but I am pretty sure that a lot more trading happens between these assets than the volume of initial investments and final cash-outs.
If someone buys assets B, he probably has just sold asset A - if he sells asset B, he will probably buy asset A simultaneously.
Trades substitute one asset for another one in the same category of risk - this makes sense because these assets are imperfect substitutes and the differences/imperfections are what investors aim for (based on their information).
One curious thing to think about is that any trade needs a counter-party - there always has to be someone who is willing to bet against your projections for whatever reasons. If you are lucky he just wants to hedge against your optimistic scenario, if you are unlucky he knows more than you.
I think a good start to tackle this whole mess of short-term analysis would be to try and track the money - you see demand for asset A is high, so you have to ask "what was sold in order to free up that liquidity?".
I don't just want to know what is happening but also how it is happening and ultimately why it is happening.
Viewing just one asset in isolation is pretty stupid because it ignores that supply/demand for that asset results from the much larger portfolio optimization problem of each agent. Watching a number of assets and the shifts between them might give you some early indicators for larger moves (but as soon as everybody has adopted your technique that part is gone) and more importantly yield you some insight about the nature of the portfolios other market participants hold. If you know what assets they hold you can make projections how they would react to a move in one of these assets and how that reaction would influence the prices of seemingly unrelated assets.
If you want to go further you could model several representative agents - say one for small shareholders, one for insurance funds, one for investment banking of commercial banks, one for unregulated funds, ... identify their restrictions, objectives, solve their optimization problems and then try to fit the movements you can observe to their interactions.
If someone offers you a really good deal IRL your first reaction should be to ask "why? what's his motivation for doing this? what's his profit in doing this?" on the financial markets many people just seem to react "haha... you're stupid, lolololol !!!" and press the "Accept" button without even attempting to find out why somebody is willing to do the other side of that trade.
[/pipe dream]
(the primary purpose of the paragraphs above is to outline my way of thinking about this topic, not to provide any feasible methodology)
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.09.23 09:20:00 -
[55]
Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha on 23/09/2010 09:21:24
Quote:
That's exactly the kind of statement which leads to "voodoo" comments
If you go to an artisan carpenter shop and see him chiseling a nice Luigi XVI-alike cabinet, do you think he's doing "voodoo"?
He learned it from someone else, he had long practice sessions, he "sees" how the finished cabinet will look like and he can notice whether the cabinet is coming up nicely or bad while he is working on it.
The same identical thing happens with trading.
Quote:
If I want to predict tomorrow's GDP, I don't only use today's and yesterday's GDP in my analysis but also data on unemployment, consumer spending, business confidence, ...
That's fundamental analysis and every decent trader does some of it. It has some stringent limitations though:
- to do it very well you need to pour in effort that may be afforded by institutions rather than smaller entities
- sh!t happens and sh!t makes the market all the time. Example: after 6 months of fantastic analysis and consulting those 100 years statistics (there are expensive collections doing this) and checking meteorology projections, you decide it's time to short sell grain futures.
The next day, Russia announces an huge fire is quickly destroying their reserves (see? This happened right this year) and price skyrockets. Welcome to your newfound ruin.
Quote:
Trades substitute one asset for another one in the same category of risk
Trades substitute one asset for another one that is less risky, even when it's done on the same category. IE people buying or selling dollars depending on how international sentiment dictates to be less or more optimistic.
People will buy gold and sell currency when they feel unsafe. They will sell houses. They buy futures to discount long term oscillations on their company sales in the same category. They hedge and even carry trade.
They trade insurance about an higher risk security vs a blue chip (also known as CDS).
Quote:
I don't just want to know what is happening but also how it is happening and ultimately why it is happening.
You may arrogate this "right" if you were a Warren Buffet. The regular guys are given a partial and biased view about the whole scenario and there is nothing you can do to clear it beyond a certain (insufficient) limit.
This is why a pragmatic approach won't even try to get to the True and Deep Hows and Whys. By the time you even came close, it's over and past anyway. Everyone would love to have all the data and details since it'd be a nice edge. Only few can have that edge and they are the market makers. The others suck it up and adapt and slap all the affordable edges they can instead.
Quote:
If someone offers you a really good deal IRL your first reaction should be to ask "why? what's his motivation for doing this? what's his profit in doing this?" on the financial markets many people just seem to react "haha... you're stupid, lolololol !!!" and press the "Accept" button without even attempting to find out why somebody is willing to do the other side of that trade
This is easy. When you RL trade you know for sure and it's a given that the other is exclusively out to screw you.
In fact TA (and any analysis, really) is all about finding out what the "strong players" / institutions are doing and brutally copy them, not "deal" with them or "go against" them.
-
Auditing & consulting
When looking for investors, please read
http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h + http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2010.09.23 16:32:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
If you go to an artisan carpenter shop and see him chiseling a nice Luigi XVI-alike cabinet, do you think he's doing "voodoo"?
He learned it from someone else, he had long practice sessions, he "sees" how the finished cabinet will look like and he can notice whether the cabinet is coming up nicely or bad while he is working on it.
The same identical thing happens with trading.
I'm sorry, I guess I completely misunderstood. This whole time I thought the point was to make money. Now it turns out that you are an "artist" and all those pretty pictures on the other thread are merely fine art. Thanks for clearing that up.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.09.23 16:58:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Claire Voyant
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
If you go to an artisan carpenter shop and see him chiseling a nice Luigi XVI-alike cabinet, do you think he's doing "voodoo"?
He learned it from someone else, he had long practice sessions, he "sees" how the finished cabinet will look like and he can notice whether the cabinet is coming up nicely or bad while he is working on it.
The same identical thing happens with trading.
I'm sorry, I guess I completely misunderstood. This whole time I thought the point was to make money. Now it turns out that you are an "artist" and all those pretty pictures on the other thread are merely fine art. Thanks for clearing that up.
Yeah it's not like the carpenter won't make money with his art, nor the painter nor the musician. They'll stare at their creations with elation and then go in a factory and assemble some cars or something. A real job for oh so much money.
-
Auditing & consulting
When looking for investors, please read
http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h + http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2010.09.23 17:06:00 -
[58]
Yeah, Van Gogh was rolling in the dough.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.09.23 17:17:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Claire Voyant
Yeah, Van Gogh was rolling in the dough.
Being unable or not caring or not needing to monetize (depending on artist) his own genius is not something ranking high in the care meter of everyone else.
-
Auditing & consulting
When looking for investors, please read
http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h + http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |