TenaciousG Posted June 25, 2009 Report Share Posted June 25, 2009 ...which for him would be an all boy's grammar school. Ok, the Trifecta has been hit - let the market sell off begin! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdporter Posted June 25, 2009 Report Share Posted June 25, 2009 ...which for him would be an all boy's grammar school. Dude that was morbidly wrong but I laughed anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdporter Posted June 25, 2009 Report Share Posted June 25, 2009 Palm on Thursday disclosed its fourth-quarter and fiscal-year 2009 results, indicating a $753 million net loss for the year. Smartphone sales continued to slide, with shipments down 62-percent for the quarter and 25-percent for the year. The Palm Pre was not included in the numbers, as the launch will instead serve as a starting point for the company's first quarter of FY10. Despite the lackluster financial information for the quarter, the loss was narrower than expected and Palm remains optimistic that webOS and the Pre will turn the company around. "We have now officially reentered the race," said Jon Rubinstein, chairman and CEO. Amazing that they can lose almost a billion dollars and remain in business. rubenstein used to run Apple's hardware division and was pretty good there, so maybe Palm will have a chance, but they'll have to sell a lot of phones to make up for all of their losses. source stock zooming of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bungster Posted June 25, 2009 Report Share Posted June 25, 2009 ...which for him would be an all boy's grammar school. Maybe better place for him....but the boyz - not so much.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetlag Posted June 25, 2009 Report Share Posted June 25, 2009 Bestest selling album ever But he lived the American dream "Such a rebound could wipe out Jackson's massive debt, estimated at $400 million." "Jackson needed a comeback to reverse the damage done by years of excessive spending and little work. " "To finance his opulent lifestyle, he borrowed heavily against his three main assets: his Neverland Ranch, his music catalog and a second catalog that includes the music of the Beatles that he co-owns with Sony Corp. By the time of his 2005 criminal trial, he was nearly $300 million in debt and, according to testimony, spending $30 million more annually than he was taking in." http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-mi...0,2152435.story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capitall Posted June 25, 2009 Report Share Posted June 25, 2009 Bestest selling album ever But he lived the American dream "Such a rebound could wipe out Jackson's massive debt, estimated at $400 million." "Jackson needed a comeback to reverse the damage done by years of excessive spending and little work. " "To finance his opulent lifestyle, he borrowed heavily against his three main assets: his Neverland Ranch, his music catalog and a second catalog that includes the music of the Beatles that he co-owns with Sony Corp. By the time of his 2005 criminal trial, he was nearly $300 million in debt and, according to testimony, spending $30 million more annually than he was taking in." http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-mi...0,2152435.story One of the interesting psychological facts about real life, as opposed to what people imagine about life, is that if a person has a neurotic program to run, they are going to run it, come hell or high water, come heaven or low water, until their dying day. Unless they make genuine efforts to face their problem and solve it. So, all the wealth that comes with being co-owner of the Beatles music and owner of his own music, and owner of that ranch, was still not enough to keep him from running his neurotic program of spending more than he earned. Many folks believe that wealth solves all a person's problems-- ain't necessarily so at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrHanky Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 I still could be wrong,but a parabolic move could be imminent. This might be a world class blowoff top never to be seen again,but I would not want to be long a damn thing after 2pm on june 30th.However,The real downside might not be till after the holiday weekend. Lots of fund managers trying to "make their year" in just a few days.We may break to new highs briefly before imploding...or not. Still guessing 950-960 by tuesday.Charts are not much help right now,it's all a game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BusKow Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 support was the minimal fibo of the whole move Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hokahay Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 Michael is with Farah. That's 2. They usually come in 3s. Ummmm. What about Ed McMahon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BusKow Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 financials are lagging this, which is an interesting though little noted (seems to me) divergence...we'll see what they got at old trend resistance just above... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rationalize Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 doc, what's your perspective on simple vs. exponentional moobing aberrages? I don't use them. I like triangular and weighted moving averages better, maybe because very few people use them, but it's a good idea to know where the 200 day simple is, simply because so many people use it. As with anything else it's a matter of watching them for a long time, understanding what the calculation represents, and knowing from experience how price behaves relative to the moving average. Some numbers make sense cyclically. Others don't. The key is not the type of indicators you use. The secret is to get the periods right. You could use the shitonastick indicator and it would work just fine if you used the correct time inputs. My 2 cents: I'd add that any moving average results in total reaming in a ranging merkit. Also, that defining the correct time inputs can only be "curve fitted" to the past. Long story short: - When a trending merket changes to a ranging merkit: Reaming. - When the cycle times change: Reaming. - When everything stays the same: Doolars!!! -> OverConfidence -> Reaming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BusKow Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 SPX down trend line from last years tops comes in ~926 tamale' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BusKow Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 daily sig's are a fickle thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrStool Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 Right. I forgot about Ed. That makes 3. Ed's another Philly guy. Dick Clark too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrStool Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 My 2 cents: I'd add that any moving average results in total reaming in a ranging merkit. Also, that defining the correct time inputs can only be "curve fitted" to the past. Long story short: - When a trending merket changes to a ranging merkit: Reaming. - When the cycle times change: Reaming. - When everything stays the same: Doolars!!! -> OverConfidence -> Reaming. I don't agree. I mean, I agree about range markets, but in a range market oscillators work very well. The right moving averages are very forgiving. They need not perfectly match the cycle length. They can still tell you a lot about how the market is likely to behave. The other thing is that I don't use a single moving average in a vacuum, and I don't use moving averages in the traditional sense at all except to identify support and resistance areas in trending markets. In cycle analysis, ALL the cycles must be considered. This is where K Wave's spaghetti concept fits in. Context is everything. It's very easy to tell, often in advance, when the market will transition from trending to ranging. The opposition of adjacent cycles causes ranges to develop. I often joke about it, but I am the king of the range callers. The problem is that calling ranges never made anybody a dime. Nobody cares. And tight ranges are very difficult to trade if you are looking for intermediate swings. On the other hand, they are manna from heaven if you are trading intraday swings or cycles up to 5 days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.