HLI - Helia Group

[tech/a]

As far as I understand - chart reading, is analysing the behaviour of market participants and how they respond to certain levels and patterns. This behaviour is being constructed minute by minute by both fundamental and technical and systematic and mum and pa traders. The fact that certain participants are willing to transact in GMA at a certain level AFTER it has gone through capital return indicates that they are valuing it higher than if they traded at that same level BEFORE the capital return.
Therefore, the stock holding that level shows a higher level of strength IMO.


I think it's pretty obvious that skc is more than an "FA".

The only price on offer is the price after the capital return---by either buyers and or sellers
They have no choice the best price on offer is todays.
Currently its down 9c on light volume.(Today at 10.30 in Adelaide)
Hardly running to buy this up.

Its just wallowing around.
Which its done for around a year.
Sure its moved up a little but $2.44 to $2.72---Really---Hooray for F/A
Hardly racing towards $4.50

STILL not a buy technically.
One day it might be but not today
or any other day in the last year.

 

[skc]

I need this why?

It will change/changes the T/A?

Coming from 2 F/A's??

If you have one please post it up I cant find one.

Lol. While your theoretical T/A may only care about prices on charts... real traders care about money in the bank. You need to change the chart because you are concerned with how much return you get from money you've put up... whether you are trading or investing.

If you don't adjust the chart, you are also say the 2 situations below are the same:

A. Buy 10,000 @ $1, current price = $1.1.
B. Buy 10,000 @ $1, stock count consolidates at ratio of 2:1, current price = $1.50 ($hit, look at the spike of the share price chart!).

This is the price chart of CSL adjusted vs unadjusted. Now tell me your technical picture is the same.



And just in case you don't know... I trade prop for a living with 80-90% of my trades being day trades these days. It'd be a bit slow to use FA alone to do that wouldn't you think?

May be you can go start a thread and show us mortals how you apply your technical analysis ?

 

[notting]

May be you can go start a thread and show us mortals how you apply your technical analysis ?

We have already seen that, hence the long sabbatical. LOL

 

[Trendnomics]

Wow the EGO's in this thread!!!

Rainman can you please change your alias to "fund/a" - also change your avatar pic to:



http://disney.wikia.com/wiki/Negaduck

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YziVpa8oZDg

The similarities in ego size is uncanny.

 

[tech/a]

Lol. While your theoretical T/A may only care about prices on charts... real traders care about money in the bank. You need to change the chart because you are concerned with how much return you get from money you've put up... whether you are trading or investing.

If you don't adjust the chart, you are also say the 2 situations below are the same:

A. Buy 10,000 @ $1, current price = $1.1.
B. Buy 10,000 @ $1, stock count consolidates at ratio of 2:1, current price = $1.50 ($hit, look at the spike of the share price chart!).

This is the price chart of CSL adjusted vs unadjusted. Now tell me your technical picture is the same.

View attachment 66998View attachment 66999


And just in case you don't know... I trade prop for a living with 80-90% of my trades being day trades these days. It'd be a bit slow to use FA alone to do that wouldn't you think?

May be you can go start a thread and show us mortals how you apply your technical analysis ?

We have already seen that, hence the long sabbatical. LOL

Have you got a chart? I cant find one.
But based on the fact it hasn't traded beyond $3.20 I cant see why it would alter the analysis.
You could be right but cant comment until I see one.



Let me make this as clear as I can.

Time is an issue for me. I was happy to run the Small caps thread but time did not allow me to be as thorough as I should have been. I'm not the type to back away---I admitted the error.

As for a number here who insist on sticking in the boot go for it.
I've supported Joe to the Tune of a few Grand which is a few grand less than 99% here.
I've spent countless hrs helping others here who are less fortunate financially than myself.

If you don't want to be involved in anything I post then don't.
But your tedious snide remarks and childish taunting is pathetic.
I've been involved in many threads over the years that has proven
my application of T/A to be spot on WOW, PEN to name a couple off my head.

SKC
I trade for an interest I don't have to trade, I trade the DAX and FTSE.
I couldn't think of anything worse than to trade for a living. I don't have too!!!
As I'm sure you know I ran a live technical trading thread (System trading) on Radges site for 7 yrs.
Turning $30K to $360K when we shut it down. I've had techtrader Published in Ragdes Book
Un Holy Grails.Pages 109 to 112 I think.

I'm a technical trader who has made a lot of money trading, I'm not in the least bit interested in Fundamental trading. Nor am I interested in trading for a living.I comment on Fundamental threads with a technical view.

 

[Rainman]

Have you got a chart? I cant find one.
But based on the fact it hasn't traded beyond $3.20 I cant see why it would alter the analysis.
You could be right but cant comment until I see one.



Let me make this as clear as I can.

Time is an issue for me. I was happy to run the Small caps thread but time did not allow me to be as thorough as I should have been. I'm not the type to back away---I admitted the error.

As for a number here who insist on sticking in the boot go for it.
I've supported Joe to the Tune of a few Grand which is a few grand less than 99% here.
I've spent countless hrs helping others here who are less fortunate financially than myself.

If you don't want to be involved in anything I post then don't.

Tech/a, with respect, you seem to be dodging the key issue with respect to your chart and that is that it does not capture the return that GMA has generated for shareholders holding from September 2015 until now. Why is that return of no concern to you?

It seems absurd simply to insist on the chart and to ignore the money that GMA has thrown off to its shareholders.

 

[tech/a]

Tech/a, with respect, you seem to be dodging the key issue with respect to your chart and that is that it does not capture the return that GMA has generated for shareholders holding from September 2015 until now. Why is that return of no concern to you?

Simple

Its not a technical buy and hasn't been.

If you read the whole thread Like I did
on the weekend that's all I've said.
Its a group of you and you in particular who
has taken issue that Technically I don't agree with you.

If you make money from it good on you.
If I have to send Joe another Grand So WHAT Ill do it gladly the guys
running a business and all support to him. I pay $40K a week In wages
Do you really think $1k is a big deal???

I wouldn't be trading it.(GMA) Its done bugger all in a year.
But if you trade this stuff go for it.

SKC I've logged endless trades on the DAX over the years in REALTIME just check the thread ---all technical.

I often pick up $500-$3000 when trading---sure I get some similar losses ---- but I don't trade because I have to. I trade because I enjoy it!
Some guys collect Cars
Some trade (I do)
Some Buy collect houses (I used to)
Some run Companies (I do).

I enjoy everything I'm involved in!

Technical is quick easy Black and White Right or Wrong.
That's why I use it.

 

[Rainman]

... I wouldn't be trading it. Its done bugger all in a year.

Right, it's done nothing all year but deliver a 22% return. It takes real chop logic to call that "nothing".

 

[tech/a]

Right, it's done nothing all year but deliver a 22% return. It takes real chop logic to call that "nothing".

Christ
Your cherry picking---it delivered at 22% return at some point.
It was also well below $2.44 at some point------

IF you'd bought it at $2.44 and sold it at $3.15 ish and held it all that time yes you would have.

But Im looking at $2.44 when I posted and tonight its closed at $2.69

Stellar!

 

[Rainman]

Christ
Your cherry picking---it delivered at 22% return at some point.
It was also well below $2.44 at some point------

IF you'd bought it at $2.44 and sold it at $3.15 ish and held it all that time yes you would have.

But Im looking at $2.44 when I posted and tonight its closed at $2.69

Stellar!

Tech/a, the bulk of the return has not come from movements in the share price. Don't you understand that?

It has come from the capital return and the dividend payments that have been made during that time. The change in the share price - which you so perceptively point out - has risen only slightly over the same time period.

 

[So_Cynical]

the bulk of the return has not come from movements in the share price.
It has come from the capital return and the dividend payments that have been made during that time.

So in other words - Dumb Luck.

 

[barney]

Can I say for what its worth ...... ASF is a much better place when there is a bit of friction/bravado/ego strutting/passion/contention/healthy disagreement etc etc ..............

Welcome back tech ("duckman"), and well done "rainman" for taking a contrary position and taking no sh#t!

The place has not been quite the same for a few months since certain "cranky" members have gone awol

Anyway, carry on you guys ... If only we could get TH to come back and stir some additional cr@p as well we would all likely benefit greatly!

 

[Triathlete]

Here is my view: 22% is a good return which was generated over 255 days...so around 31.50% annualised.

I took a look at posts 160 and 166 which showed where the possibility was on entering GMA Technically when this discussion first got going.

The two trades back then that were closed out after 41 days have still shown a greater return around 25% if they are calculated over 255 days as well or 36% annualised, the main difference is I did not have to have my money tied up for so long and could have used it elsewhere or taken more trades in GMA if the opportunity was there.

So there you have it Fundies have made money

and the Techies have made money....

That's all from me....

 

[Rainman]

So in other words - Dumb Luck.

Clearly you know nothing about GMA.

This is the second time in less than a year that GMA has made a special capital distribution to shareholders. Why does it do this?

GMA generates a combined ratio of less than 50%. It does this consistently. What that means in layman's speak is that it generates excess capital which in its public announcements it has repeatedly said it would distribute to shareholders.

Therefore, back in September, it was only a matter of time before GMA would make another special distribution. And I will go further and say that, if it is able to maintain its current combined ratio of less than 50%, it is likely that it will make another capital distribution in another year or two.

 

[tech/a]

Here is my view: 22% is a good return which was generated over 255 days...so around 31.50% annualised.

I took a look at posts 160 and 166 which showed where the possibility was on entering GMA Technically when this discussion first got going.

The two trades back then that were closed out after 41 days have still shown a greater return around 25% if they are calculated over 255 days as well or 36% annualised, the main difference is I did not have to have my money tied up for so long and could have used it elsewhere or taken more trades in GMA if the opportunity was there.

So there you have it Fundies have made money

and the Techies have made money....

That's all from me....

Sorry Tri but hind site is rubbish.

As far as I was concerned there was/is a bet about where the price is 25/9/16

Id post up if and when it was a technical buy or something of technical interest appeared.
The only reason I'm back on here is Rainman wanted to draw a line and end the wager early.

For me nothing has changed.

I was un aware that I could trade the instrument until then and claim profit---(Which Rainman did 4 days after it reached its high----hindsite easy call 4 days after it happened.) Imagine if I traded with calls 4 days after they occurred!! Entry and exit!

As you know (Tri) there are many ways to technically trade this.
As the point has been made that its grossly undervalued then I've been looking for technical entries that indicate a longer term change in sentiment.

EG

Longterm Indications

A large gap in price not necessarily supported by volume
A gap up without volume may indicate a complete withdrawal of supply.

A high range day with or without volume which holds price above its low over a number of following days.
---Same as the gap.

A number of days with good range and fair volume
Then small consolidations as price continues on Price advances consistently with small retracements.

Short term Indications would consist of taking a position near an historic support zone and selling around historic resistance zones. (While this has happened that's not what I was/am looking for).

Of course if you wanted to trade it using CFD's then you could also look for short trades---technically.

There have been and will be short term opportunities technically for GMA.
But as far as I'm aware that's not the discussion---its about being GROSSLY undervalued.

Right now its in no mans land neither short or long.

Anyone have an adjusted chart still cant find one----Premium data? I use Just Data for EOD
Ill check Interactive.

 

[Rainman]

Sorry Tri As far as I was concerned there was/is a bet about where the price is 25/9/16... Id post up if and when it was a technical buy or something of technical interest appeared.
The only reason I'm back on here is Rainman wanted to draw a line and end the wager early.

For the third time, I am happy to let the bet play out until 25 September 2016.

But at wherever the share price closes on that day the dividends, capital returns and the reduction of the float that have been made during the period must be brought to account in determining what the total gain (or loss) has been for the period.

 

[skyQuake]

Just to show you how meaningless this chart is: if you had held GMA through September 2015 to now, you'd have earned a 22% return in an environment of 2% bond yields and where the market is down around 3% over the same period.

What? Sept 22 ($1.44 break) to now is about +8%.

Anyways back to the stock - anyone have thoughts on counterparty concentration risk (CBA) ? I believe all that comes out Dec.
Also how exposed is the book to say rising rates/aussie housing downturn? There is nothing out there as far as I know.

 

[tech/a]

For the third time, I am happy to let the bet play out until 25 September 2016.

But at wherever the share price closes on that day the dividends, capital returns and the reduction of the float that have been made during the period must be brought to account in determining what the total gain (or loss) has been for the period.

Why

You never knew that was going to happen when the bet was taken.
Nor did I.
You cant change the bet mid stream.
You cant just add bits to suit you.
Price is price.

The bet was and still is $2.44 25/9/16

For the Fourth time.

 

[McLovin]

Also how exposed is the book to say rising rates/aussie housing downturn? There is nothing out there as far as I know.

Combined ratio ~50%...Guess where that's going in a downturn. The general insurers have CORs in the low 90% to over 100%. This is basically a single event insurer: My opinion is that residential property tanks it's going to be Australia wide. As long as everything is fine in residential property it will toss off cash. If mortgage foreclosures rise well then you better hope the actuaries knew what they were doing.

 

[skc]

Have you got a chart? I cant find one.
But based on the fact it hasn't traded beyond $3.20 I cant see why it would alter the analysis.
You could be right but cant comment until I see one.

You can see the prices here for adjusted vs unadjusted for GMA.

https://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?s=GMA.AX

Let me make this as clear as I can.

Time is an issue for me. I was happy to run the Small caps thread but time did not allow me to be as thorough as I should have been. I'm not the type to back away---I admitted the error.

Clearly coincidental that you ran out of time at the precise moment that an error was pointed out.

As for a number here who insist on sticking in the boot go for it.
I've supported Joe to the Tune of a few Grand which is a few grand less than 99% here.
I've spent countless hrs helping others here who are less fortunate financially than myself.

Thank you for your financial support for the ASF. But when you lose a wager on the forum and pay up to Joe... that's you losing a wager.

Regardless, your support for ASF has nothing to do with the fact that you talk down others who hold different ways of making money in the market.

You may want to support ASF by making it a more friendly and constructive environment.

I've been involved in many threads over the years that has proven
my application of T/A to be spot on WOW, PEN to name a couple off my head.

A simplest illustration of how TA and FA work. The shares were in a downtrend. The downtrend was created by people selling the stock who knows the share better than those who were buying. Those who were buying got their FA wrong. Those who were selling got their FA right. So can people please stop throwing out examples of TLS or Enron as how FA doesn't work and TA is superior. These examples at best only prove that right TA is superior to wrong FA.

SKC
I trade for an interest I don't have to trade, I trade the DAX and FTSE.
I couldn't think of anything worse than to trade for a living. I don't have too!!!
As I'm sure you know I ran a live technical trading thread (System trading) on Radges site for 7 yrs.
Turning $30K to $360K when we shut it down. I've had techtrader Published in Ragdes Book
Un Holy Grails.Pages 109 to 112 I think.

Great to see.. although not sure what I am supposed to imply from this.

I'm a technical trader who has made a lot of money trading

What is a lot of money? Turing $30k into $360k over 7 years? I guess some might consider that mildly impressive for an amateur. But I think quite a few people will scoff at this comment - Minwa only made about 1/3 of that in a single month (and he uses TA too)... I know TA works in the right hands at the right times so you don't need to convince me of such.

If you don't want to be involved in anything I post then don't.
But your tedious snide remarks and childish taunting is pathetic.

Agree Rainman is at times just as bad. Everything you say about him applies equally to yourself. And any change in behaviour you wish to see from him... I wish to see from you.