# T/A is for wood-ducks



## tulip (2 February 2005)

Only joking!!! Now that I have your attention let me address this to those of us that find the millions of combinations, permutations and flirtations of T/A a little more than slightly confusing, here are a couple of thoughts.  

You have to be a geek (and I mean that in the nicest possible sense) to delve into the bowels of T/A.  You have to be dispassionate about the composition of the stock market and divorce yourself of any superfluous information such as CPI, inventory levels of gold etc.  You concentrate solely on the maths.  What may be seen as a slight contradiction is that I believe success is not possible for those that have not worked in the industry, you need experience to know which indicators will perform under current conditions.  Understand that you have to compete against the smartest and most disciplined traders to be successful and make a dollar.  Backtesting won't give you the answer.  Real live action is all that counts.

Simple T/A combined with simple F/A will give you a well rounded view of the market and will allow you to hone your skills.  You will lean to T/A or F/A after a while, depending on which fits your style, but should always use the other for confirmation prior to investing.

F/A is for the research nuts, always looking for an angle.  Find a sector that fits with your area of expertise (you may work in the medical industry) and interest and do your research.  Hopefully you will see which are the better opportunities in that sector.  If number crunching is not your area, learn it.  Research managements' history of achieving targets and milestones.  Too many companies offer blue sky, never deliver but the exec's line their pockets along the way.  I believe F/A can offer many opportunities to invest early into potential growth stories that all too often become evident years later.  You are not competing against the might of intelligence of the funds, because they are restricted on their investments into smaller stocks and don't put a whole lot of effort into them until they come up on the radar.  You have an advantage in this area.

T/A, you are behind the eightball.  F/A, you have a genuine competitive advantage.


----------



## tech/a (2 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*

*What may be seen as a slight contradiction is that I believe success is not possible for those that have not worked in the industry, you need experience to know which indicators will perform under current conditions. * 

Well there you go either get a job in the industry and serve your apprenticeship or plain give up!

Must go call the broker to liquidate all holdings.

I now understand your annoyance at success from one "Unqualified".
I also understand your continued desire to discredit---after all how on earth can we have an "Unqualified" individual expousing HIS methods of achieved success------Free when we the all knowing SHOULD be paid for such knowledge!

So I suppose I should also sell all my Realestate holdings as Im not a Realestate agent either!

Well your allowed your belief I personally dont agree with it and I also encourage others to ignore it ------put in enough effort and you can succeed.

As for T/A
In discretionary usage I tend to agree.Most have very little knowledge on the composition of indicators and their correct use.I personally prefer price action.
F/A in my veiw is also similar in that its interpretation and indeed accuracy can be questioned.

For me the developement of a mechanical method has suited my trading.Takes 10 mins a day Im not glued to the screen and have heaps of time to run a company and spend hrs talking with you all.
It wont suit everyone but those who like the idea now have the opportunity to investigate openly how one person is doing it.

I lookforward to truckloads of fertilizer on the first drawdown of my/our method.Until then carry on.


----------



## doctorj (2 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*

Are you saying that fund managers and other entities that command large portfolios don't look for fundamental reasons to enter a stock?

I think your premise is flawed. Technical analysis involves a good understanding of statistics and the ability to understand patterns and so forth. Fundamental analysis looks for stocks that are undervalued or stocks that have the potential to change in value as a result of a change or event that adds value to their company.

I would suggest that more money in the market moves as a result of fundamental rather than technical analysis.  This is evidenced by the fact that many anaylists reports provide lengthy fundamental, rarely technical, analysis. I agree that fundamental analysis, particularly if an entity is well researched and informed on the sector and company they are looking to invest in, it may afford the opportunity to invest ahead of the wave.  That said, I think the ability to be able to ignore the fundamental side of things in favour of the technical does give some distinct advantages.

A fundamental analysis of a listed company can result in a plethora of different interpretations as much more of it is subjective rather than objective.  With the goal of making money, even partly on capital appreciation, ideally you'd like as many other people to agree with your point of view as possible so they too put in some buy orders.


----------



## tech/a (2 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*

Doc dont know who your refering to .

But yes I agree with you.
But even in a bull market with rooms full of fundamental analysts there are many funds going backwards standing still or underperforming.And these guys have degrees in economics.In my case my fundamental analysis is done by BT in selection for inclusion in their margin list.Theyve got it right on many Ive entered over the last 2 or so years.All this research and expertise for no cost and no time input.Fantastic.

Niether are exact sciences used in a discretionary manner.


----------



## doctorj (2 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*

Reading it again, I'm not sure what I'm referring to either.  Unfortunately a good economy makes for incredibly painful, quiet times at work and I’m left without a single thing to do.  Kinda increases the propensity to ramble, apparently.


----------



## ghotib (2 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*



			
				doctorj said:
			
		

> Reading it again, I'm not sure what I'm referring to either.  Unfortunately a good economy makes for incredibly painful, quiet times at work and I’m left without a single thing to do.  Kinda increases the propensity to ramble, apparently.



ROFL  

So we should be hoping for an economic downturn to give you something to do as well as to give value investors something to buy - is that it?

Wanna hold a guessing competition for people to guess what your work is? Sorry, I'm busy right now.

Ghoti


----------



## doctorj (2 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*

At the risk of dragging this thread off topic (despite it being deservedly so)... any guesses?


----------



## tulip (2 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*

"Are you saying that fund managers and other entities that command large portfolios don't look for fundamental reasons to enter a stock?"
doctorj, there are restrictions on levels of risk fund managers are allowed.  My post was aimed at looking for companies that have not hit the radar screens of the bigger funds.  Please yourself.

tech/a you must be glued to the screen.  I thought you had me on ignore?  I find your posts quite amusing, keep them coming.  I'll bet you have a little dick.


----------



## tulip (2 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*

"So I suppose I should also sell all my Realestate holdings as Im not a Realestate agent either!"

I believe John Elliot has been offered your prime real estate holding, according to todays paper.  Showbag!


----------



## Porper (2 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*



			
				tulip said:
			
		

> "  I'll bet you have a little dick.




I think you are on the wrong forum mate, Hotcopper is the place for you, besides how do you know tech A is a bloke.

You obviously have an inferiority complex about your own manhood to come out with a comment like that.


----------



## tech/a (2 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*

Unsuccessful professionals dont you love em!!

And they wonder why!!!

Accused of using alias's and hes been doing it all along.

You are a complete embarrasment to your profession.

Tulip/Moneybags(Oh tree) added to ignore list---what a complete and utter FOOL. 

Hahahaha.


----------



## tulip (2 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*

Becuase he's been called John? and actually announced he's a builder.  Fair enough?


----------



## tulip (2 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*

You supposedly had me on ignore a few days ago tech/a, but you love reading about yourself.  You have already become flustered, add that to abusive trait.  I think you've got a bit of work to do before you put your hard earned dollars on a trading plan with many, many flaws.

Prove that you have actually traded this plan.  I for one don't believe it.  $35 million profit you said earlier.  Anyone believe that?


----------



## stefan (2 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*

Tulip,
Whether or not you believe in T/A is one thing and you're welcome to discuss and argue about it as much as you like. 

It is however quite another thing to start getting abusive against other members on this forum. Personal attacks and comments like the one you made regarding the size of certain body parts are off limits and won't be tolerated.

Size doesn't matter in this game. Whether you're a t/a or f/a. All that counts is brain and experience. If you're blessed with either one of them then you will find a way to post on here without much trouble.

Happy trading

Stefan


----------



## money tree (2 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*



			
				tech/a said:
			
		

> You are a complete embarrasment to your profession.
> Tulip/Moneybags(Oh tree) added to ignore list---what a complete and utter FOOL.




How do you know what tulips profession is? Or mine for that matter. 
Are you suggesting I am tulip? Oh silly me. It wasnt a suggestion. It was a baseless accusation. Added insult to injury by calling me a fool.

You are like a big girl who closes her eyes and starts swinging her fists, doesnt matter who she hits long as someone cops a blow

Here you go again, making a complete pratt of yourself.


----------



## Joe Blow (2 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*



			
				tulip said:
			
		

> I'll bet you have a little dick.




Tulip, 

Personal attacks such as this are not tolerated at Aussie Stock Forums. There are plenty of other forums around if you want to go that route... but let me assure you that it's not acceptable here. I am determined to keep these forums as civilised as possible.

Please don't try it again.

Thanks, 
Joe


----------



## money tree (2 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*

as usual, one rule for the mortals and another for tech/a

grow some kahuna's Joe


----------



## RodC (2 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*

tulip and moneytree, crashy (are you the same person?)

What is your agenda, all I see from all(?) of you is constant bickering, sniping and insults. As far as I can see the only people on this forum who have really illustrated how they go about their trading are tech/a, WayneL and Stefan. tech/a's system is on reefcap for all to read. 

If you consider there are flaws in these systems, by all means say so and question, but personal insults don't add anything to your credibility.

So far I haven't read anything from you to illustrate your "alleged" greater credibility.

Rod


----------



## Joe Blow (2 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*



			
				money tree said:
			
		

> as usual, one rule for the mortals and another for tech/a
> 
> grow some kahuna's Joe




money tree,

I'm afraid you misunderstand. There is nothing wrong with disagreeing with someone's views but it is another thing to make it personal.

You are free to disagree with tech/a - or anyone else who posts here for that matter - all you like, but the moment you attack a member on a personal level it becomes my business because that is not the sort of forum that I am interested in running. Unmoderated forums filled with personal attacks are a dime a dozen.

I will give one warning to anyone who steps over the line and on a second offense I won't hesitate to ban them because I will not tolerate trolls and troublemakers on this site for one second.


----------



## money tree (2 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*

perhaps you misunderstood. 

Despite tech/a firing personal insults on at least 10 occasions, you have done NOTHING. yet other posters get a warning. 

Smacks of corruption of favoritism or something, not quite sure but IT STINKS

Your statements are therefore FALSE. You DO NOT "give one warning to anyone who steps over the line and on a second offense I won't hesitate to ban" because as we have seen tech/a keeps on getting away with it

Treat everyone equally.


----------



## Joe Blow (2 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*



			
				money tree said:
			
		

> Treat everyone equally.




I haven't seen one post of tech/a's where I consider that he has stepped over the line.

Tulip received a warning from me for making an unprovoked, obscene, insulting remark. If he does it again he will be banned.

I have no problem with healthy debate but I will not tolerate the sort of remark that Tulip is guilty of more than once from anyone.

It is completely unacceptable and I challenge you to show me where tech/a has said anything even remotely similar.


----------



## money tree (2 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*

I havent been able to find them all because the search on this site is hopeless:

"You are a complete embarrasment to your profession."

"Tulip/Moneybags(Oh tree) added to ignore list---what a complete and utter FOOL."

"Your starting to look like a monkey with a chip the size of Everest on its shoulder."

"DONT reply the idiots will think Im looking for an ego massage"


----------



## doctorj (3 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*

Far be it from me to state the bleeding obvious, but if you don't like it, you don't have to read it.  There are ignore functions and the option of leaving this discussion forum in favour of other ones, that in your view, may be administered more to your liking.

I would encourage you to leave if you continue to prove willing to detract from the value of this forum.  I am all for offering different opinions and even defending these differences with passion, however it must be done with a level of respect for one another.  Persuing this difference in the manner you have not only does not add any value to this forum, but is an immense waste of your time.  

Time is money. Being active in discussions on this forum onbviously means you're interested in money. Don't waste money by wasting time.


----------



## tech/a (3 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*

I personally have had enough of the inuendo and accusations.

Now Im of the opinion that Crashy Tulip and Money tree are the same but regardless the following is open to anyone in a singular entity or all 3.

Ive been accused of.

(1) Lying about the Method I trade TechTrader testing a return of $35 million if there were enough $s available to trade every trade selected by the method over the 8 yr test period.

(2) Lying that I trade my own system Techtrader.

(3) Lying that I(Wife and I) have a nett worth of over a Million.

Now Im happy to prove all of the above but lets see how big YOUR nuts are.

Ill have my legal people (at my expense) draw up a binding agreement along the following lines.

(1) If I cannot prove to auditors (Ernst Young at my expense) anyone of the 3 issues above I will send $5000 on each account un proven by bank cheque to the Red Cross Tsunami fund.So if 3 of you enter and Im full of myself thats $45k to charity.
Now that would have you beeming!!!.

(2) If I cannot prove the above I will PUBLICALLY make a statement to that effect on this Board and that of Reefcaps.

(3) If I can prove the above then who ever takes this up pays $5000 on each issue proven to the same organisation.If Crashy is the only one then thats $15000.

(4) If I can prove the above he who takes this up makes a public apology on THIS forum to me.

Either you put up you people or SHUT UP.

I agree Joe is very very lax in allowing victimisation of posters.
Your accusations and intimidation should have been stopped well before now!

GO FOR IT---- you spineless self centered egotistical wanker/s you deserve an expensive lesson (Well should be a pittance).

Enough is enough is absolutely enough Ive had it!!!!!!!   

Ill take your warning on board JOE!


----------



## money tree (3 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*

"you spineless self centered egotistical wanker/s"

see what I mean?

one rule for tech/a and another for everyone else. tech/a is free to sling any accusations he likes and nobody says a word. If anyone else does it there is hell to pay.

tech/a, 

I AM NOT TULIP


----------



## doctorj (3 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*

Who cares?


----------



## Jett_Star (3 February 2005)

*Re: T/A is for wood-ducks.*

I thought this was a forum for people interested in the Australian Stock Market and associated topics.

What is with the drama? :cussing: 

People please find another board to mud sling on, there is plenty of juicy ones out there.:brille:


----------

