SIUYA

I am betting the guy who bought oil at the top was a speculator, and if they were following their plan either way...it was probably a good trade...... more interesting was who sold?

no questions yet, but I am liking the simplicity of it all and at first look it would get you in at many of the same levels as anything else similar (breakouts etc) , but without too much complication....simple setup, alert and trigger.....I look forward to your expansion on it.

I just Interactive brokers....easy cheap etc; crap service, but at least they dont try and on sell rubbish they just offer a platform.

Dont worry Ingot - I dont think you are too much of a kook, and in the interests of an enjoyable fun discussion I am just pushing your buttons.... Personally I am more of an anarchist....or maybe not what you are talking about is moral hazard - and that is what the governments by bailing people out have done. Haven't you heard the old one - borrow 1 million dollars, you cant repay, you are in trouble...borrow 100million, cant repay the bank is in trouble....maybe that should be changed to the tax payer is in trouble. But you have to blame the people who borrow just as much as those that push the borrowings. Otherwise, why dont you go and borrow a truck load and say too bad to the lenders. He is the other thing.....and this is something the last great depression shows us and why the central banks have gone down the road they did.....if they did not where would/might we be? The closest thing we have to compare is the great depression...single individual countries as a comparison dont rate as a fair comparison when we are talking about the risk of these two big to fail issues. "By the way, Greece owes LESS than some of the states of the USA! Why aren't these facts out in the headlines??"...........they are, but you have to compare like for like, and the USA while still having problems was not to the extreme of Greeces, plus often its not got to do just with debt, its to do with if you can organise repayments, renegotiations, and if you can repay and have other still lend you money....as an example there are plenty of companies that were good that go broke with poor cash flow issues. ""The ultimate goal is slavery, and nothing will make me waver from that belief. I like to follow trends, and the "trend" is NOT towards more freedom, is it? "" Depends on your time frame and who you think you are a slave to - we have more freedoms around the world than in most history, you dont need to go back to far to see what Europe was like......and for the vast majority of people we clearly have healthier, longer living, and more freer lives....we just have a different slave master maybe.... consumerism ??? and debt helps us feed that ???? "" I just never saw an honest banker, honest politician, honest lawyer ... and strangely, these are the very people who are shaping our future."" thats a bit harsh....I would think there are plenty of honest ones, its just that they are incentivised and encouraged to follow self interest (as are you) and they are not penalised if they fail (the moral hazard!).....it does not make them dishonest. The ones who bend the rules or push them as they exist...no matter the rules often benefit the most from them, OR what about those that fight the rules, often they are the terrorists, the dissidents until possibly they become the freedom fighters and the liberators....then they usually become the slave masters and the cycle begins. and its ironic isn't it that you and i choose to participate in the very world that allows us all that freedom and access to markets.

i am confused ingot. are you having a go at the people who lend the money and then demand repayment, or the Greeks (or whoever it may be) for living beyond their means? regardless of both of those it seems that ultimately you are angling at a global parliament/government conspiracy.... maybe thats not such a bad thing? Why do we have all these different regulatory issues, taxes, sovereignty rights, nationalism based on a border on a map, based on what....a river, a few hundred years of history, cultural back grounds? We can allow open markets for some things and not others and then complain when we seemingly are at a disadvantage. Maybe its a good thing to get rid of all the various governments of the world as it seems most people dont want them, have little trust in them and think they are corrupt. It might save some money, inefficiencies and actually be a better representation of democracy..... and is democracy such a good thing anyway? clearly these are all just questions, but the original question remains - and if its as you suggest - the Communists - highly likely..... then they had their little social experiment in the 20th century and it was a dismal failure...not just for the millions they killed.....so its best to ignore the protesters......they should have voted in the recent elections Now I love a good conspiracy - but what if there is none, what if its just a natural course of human events, and no matter what set of rules we have, we will ultimately end in the same spot? Have you seen the South Park episode - mystery of the Urinal Deuce..... (end of financial year here in Australia - so a few wines over a nice lunch while the institutions rebalance their portfolios for their end of year performances allows the conspiracy theories to flow....and yes, i exercise my right to protest every election )

good point.....the times I have traded a breakout on an equity index only to watch it mean revert are too numerous, and the chop can cause exactly the situation JEH had - failure to take the really good break. With trading breakouts there are a couple of important issues that need to be taken into consideration with the trading plan that I find are crucial - IMHO these are particular to breakout trading and unfortunately there seems to be no middle ground..... Some of these trade offs in a nutshell are... 1....if you only take pullbacks of a breakout, then you are guaranteed to get every stop, and yet might miss out on the big runners 2....if you keep your stops close, you must be prepared to do more trades and hence you will have more small losses and you must be prepared to keep going after a string of losses, otherwise if wanting to have less trades you will need bigger stops, and hence maybe less qty per trade. 3....if you dont run the good breakouts then point 2 which ever way you do it is pointless (IMHO) 4.....better suited to building a position over a longer term to catch a trend, as the point of a breakout is that it is based around a trending instrument, and therefore you have the issue of taking profits (or part profits) v letting it ride and building positions. 5....exits - do you take profits at certain levels, or let it ride and risk that your profits can disappear. 6....time frame is crucial - if you are trading off daily breaks, then a longer term strategy must be used, shorter term breaks allow more trades, but possibly more mean reversion in the trend - more opportunities to stuff it up maybe. I think these are all related to the issues of trend following as breakout trades and trend following go well together, and unfortunately I believe there is no middle ground here because consistency is crucial for a lot of these issues. eg; if you take the opinion that you take profits, you will always miss the big moves, if you let them ride, then your peak to trough PL drawdowns will be large and refering back to sdomas post - this means that applying one set of rules for breakout trading can have vastly different results for different instruments.....meaning even more frustrations!

i hate earnings seasons also (trading Australian stocks).....there are quite a few people I know in the same boat. They take the time off, or if they are fundamentally based spend time seeing companies, researching etc. Do i have a solution....no. I usually just sit and wait, sometimes there are opps, othertimes the gaps hurt.....as too much depends on market expectations, market context and the like. Plus....how do you explain those stocks that take three days of going down to digest a good result (or seemingly so) and then gap up on day 4 to go over the highs of the last three days.

so who are the guys in Greece that are protesting on the street - those who dont want to pay taxes, or those that want someone else to pay for their lifestyle, or maybe they are actually just protesting that the government is corrupt and so paying taxes is a waste of time.

the other problem with buying back the put is that often if the stock is in a bit of trouble volatility goes up and liquidity can dry up in the market (depends on the stock). The other rule which must be adhered if adopting a short volatility strategy is always buy the options back when they are a few cents - who cares if they are theoretically worth zero, you did not sell them because of their theoretical values.....buy them back when you have made most of the money. It will only take one day to wipe out lots of gains. Selling options IS a valid strategy - but you need to know the risks and what your real exposure is.....additionally it generally helps to approach it in a portfolio insurance company like manner, knowing that the ''law'' of large numbers (if there really is such a thing ) then works partially in your favour. Think about this, and many people dont, or when they do it makes them think more about the risk retruns - the most you will make when selling options (or most things) is the price you sell it for. There is no possibility to compound returns from the original trade.

at 1600 have much of your portfolio would you have sold 1%, 10%, 100% Thats all you would have made! While shorting is great, it gives you diminishing returns on the original short , whereas getting the run on the long of a stock from 1 to 8 will generally give you better returns.... I saw the chart as well and went - holy moly - like an internet stock I once dated.

always worth a question - thats what forums are for. But in answer to your question - no. The pattern your referred to is not really a short term trading pattern.....and for me the stock is in a massive long term down trend, so unless you are in a long term investment fundamentally based mode - no

how long is a piece of string? A better question as most people will likely come out with is - is it worth while? (and for this reason % are irrelevant - you need to look at absolutes) If I have $10,000 an make a return of $100,000 for the year, is this better than having $100,000 and making $200,000 for the year. This clearly is dependent on what you require to live as well as what you want to spend you days doing in terms of a job, mix with a bit of reality that many will fail due partially to being undercapitalised. Also take into consideration inflation.......unless you grow your account making $25,000 a year now is not going to be sufficient in ten, twenty years...... So profitability while a nice thing, and a vital element - the thing to focus on is longer term sustainability in both consistency to trading method and scaleability in absolute dollar amounts....as the focus to the 18-24 month learning curve.

If I open a shop selling pencils I buy for 80cents to sell for $2.00 - i am not speculating, I am receiving a margin for providing ready access to a supply of pencils. insurance companies - most of the time our house wont burn down....., gaming companies - they provide a venue for the entertainment dollar dont they , lawyers - where do I start farmers - why cant we grow our own food in pots and small plots instead of subsiding people who speculate on the weather, food is such a vital part of society it should not be allowed to be in the hands of such speculators - lets privatize it ? (ps...I am a farmers son) nahhh.... I am in agreement with UB and Tams and figure most people here will agree. Speculation is about providing liquidity - and feeding brokers of course! (Negotiator - I think you are pushing arbitrage opps more - free money is not speculating :haha:)

adding to optiontimers IMHO perfect analysis is that, you will get a 90 cents/5000 cents = 1.8% return for 2 months (still not too bad) This is because your actual exposure is $50. While this is a conservative view, it will also accurately reflects reality if things go bad. (while not anti selling options, it never really features in my trading but often people underestimate the risks of selling them, verses the perceived returns)

patience and being picky are key to all styles and all instruments...... One thing I have realised out of doing more FX trading, and implementing some of Thales ideas....and this works more me me personally, is that if I am going to take a trade such as yours Cory - and then the one that I took in a similar manner slightly higher, as I dont think your trade was so bad, is that I will move my stop to BE very quickly. ..... this way pickiness does not become such an issue. You might have more scratch trades....but so what - this is not a competition of who has the best looking trade journal statistics.... its about not losing money, and then making the most of those that go our way. When it comes to FX - and I dont apply the same thing to other instruments, as my bread and butter has been equities and equity indexes..... I am happy to have 90% trades go out at scratch (or lets say an average of a small loss) as I then only need a few to go my way. The liquidity of the FX markets allows this. I found personally that FX and equities trade ideas are different and for me personally applying the exact same ideas to both does not work. I would add one other thing where this works more for my personal situation is that I dont require the income from the FX trading....this is for me something I build positions in, and if they keep trending my way and I have a big position on then it makes money - great, if not no big deal.....taking profits off each individual trade is an entirely different situation....hence pickiness OR a move to BE very quickly may be an option depending on the situation. Can you have both? - probably. (I still occasionally read this still Cory and hope you feel you are making good progress and it becomes a good thread for how continually challenging/frustrating/learning this can be)

for me....two things stuck out that influence any trades I do. In Corys case, IF taking his trade, because of these I would have moved the stop to BE quickly....meaning the trade still might have made money, but no harm if stopped out. (presently using a different measure - but similar Thales, but one involving more gut feel from me and so no real need of a chart, I have shorted it at 1.4307....no target, stop initially at 1.4322, moving that to BE on a break of 1.42875....just in case) Also as the stock market is pretty crap at present, starting to look more at FX again - only taking shorts for me in the EURUSD.....waiting to sell rallies. http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=25021&stc=1&d=1309235224

"Most people believe that the Fed really is able to anticipate the economic future. " I find this statement the most interesting - for me it seems most people "hope" the fed (or equivalent central body, or analyst even) can anticipate the economic future, when in reality while most people understand they cant, they still want to hang their hat on something or someone as a reason for their view point. Even if you can predict the future as an economist, then what - there is a lot more to it to actually monetise it......better to think of the Fed as a risk manager...not a money maker. (when it comes to analysts particularly stock analysts - they only really have one gear - buy, buy and buy)

stocks are very different to FX - while the general principles to trade them may be the same they have different characteristics and its worth learning them before committing too much money. As I understand it depending on where you live and the account you hold, 100-200 leverage is not as likely to be possible. Plus just because they offer you leverage does not mean you should use it....its a good way to go broke. The other thing is as a suggestion - dont think in terms of cents and dollars when it comes to currencies - think in terms of pips or ticks and percentages. The moves are generally smaller than for stocks, but the liquidity is generally better, the leverage greater (but see suggestion above) and they trade around the clock. If you manage your trades for risk return as in the standard format of risking a percentage of equity to trade each time, then you should be able to work out if your leverage is excessive, OR you PL is not going to be sufficient as the moves can be reasonable small in percentage terms. Run the numbers yourself - its the only way to learn what suits you. Also check out threads regards FX brokers, and who you are dealing with, what their reputations are like, their spreads, commissions etc; the FX world has more sharks than goldfish in it. hope this helps somewhat

no.....its a public internet forum whereby people discuss issues/ideas and freely exchange viewpoints. They use analogies and reword what they say in order to somehow better explain and express their ideas. Steve you offer a lot to people here in this discussion and I for one after reading many of the posts agree with much of it. I dont care if you can trade, cant trade, do trade dont trade. The point is that maybe in a public forum you are coming off a little defensive and over reacting and then reverting into constant belittling and name calling.....while others are also guilty of this there seems to be a constant trend and common thread.....it is you. I say this as a suggestion that maybe it is something to think about for all of us. (n hallet - sorry your thread has been hijacked)

100% agree with Ingot and thales....and might I add....there is nothing more sickening (keeping with the food theme) of a cook who thinks they are the only cook in the world with skills, that their cooking is the greatest and every else is a fool and a fraud. You might be the best cook in the world but it does not make you a pleasant person to interact with.....and I thought over food and forums are places at which you wish to interact pleasantly.

Ingot - you are touching on the ideas of freedom of choice and do we really want it, and are we actually able to handle it and the consequences that come with it.....this is not really just related to male/female relationships. If you take it back to trading it can very easily be applied here.....and the reality is we only really have three choices to chose from - long, short, flat/square.....and even these three choices throw up endless conundrums of when to apply these freedoms.... eye yi yi yi yi...the head spins.

for me post #16 ake and post #18 Minoo provide the info. It does not matter if you are male or female.....its what you do that counts - cut the losses quickly, dont overtrade, run the winners.... now if these happen to be traits that females have in abundance compared to men, then yes they probably make better traders. Problem is they might not have the other requirement most deem necessary for successful trading - a passion for the markets, which could explain why a lot of women dont trade....I mean what other profession has so little barriers to entry that sexual discrimination does not play a part. What was very interesting was with Minoo article is that its often very true.....in bull markets the most aggressive players make the most money - but it does not mean they also dont loose it later.....does this make them the better traders? I think not. Anyone who has worked for trading firms would have seen this plenty of times.

more importantly why is it that people keep trying to buy them and support their underlying flawed policies.....I guess macro is the same as day trading - some people just dont know when to cut losses, trade quantities beyond their capitalized base and then eventually when it all goes wrong look back shake their heads and say next time I will do it better. The greater fool theory works in all aspects of the markets its just that the times frames are often different and the excuses vary - the reasons for the problems and the consequences are often the same. Remember the Asian bond/currency crisis back in 1997, the markets were aware of the issues for months, and then one day the equity markets cracked. they bounced back quickly but at the time, they were in an uptrend and we did not have the issues the world has today.....so at some stage the musical chairs may stop. but the bounce may not be as good. As I understand it however, there is a a lot of cash sitting around at present, so maybe there are some wary people out there. The scary thing is if there is real contagion - I would be more worried about Italy and the European banks. the one nice thing is that it can actually be reasonably and surprisingly easy to fix these spending deficit imbalances over short periods of time - I read a great macro economic paper years ago before these things were seemingly an issue (I never saved the paper) and they showed how quickly things can be turned around. Unfortunately it takes the will of the people and the politicians to do so, and that is not happening anywhere.

Greece probably has it secretly stashed away - they are refusing to pay their debts and hoping the other Europeans will stop their meddling and bailing them out - they want their debts to be wiped out so they can start the whole process again....its just those damm Germans and their meddling again. I bet its them that are secretly auditing the gold..... What are the odds Ron Paul has actually done some dodgy deals in the past and the guilt has been eating away at him, and so he accuses others of the same crime to help sooth his restless soul....? with his quote "This is one of the few legitimate functions of government: To check our ownership and be fiscally responsible and find out just what we own and whether it's really there," said Paul, who is among those running for the Republican presidential nomination. I wonder if he held George W up to the same scrutiny the former republican president?

exactly - often people ask for the ideal thing in one area and if you reverse the tables to a separate idea they would scoff at what you ask. This can be applied to many other aspects of life involving things such as discrimination, bias, politics and religion. Try it sometime - take an article about race, sex, feminism etc; swap all the words from male to female, black to white - whatever....then read it.....often what you found agreeing with one minute can be offensive the next. Thanks for the belly laugh Tams. What this guy needs is a funds manager, and surprise surprise even good fund managers some times get it wrong - Paulson and sino forest comes to mind as a current example.