BS or Not?

[nero3]

Re: Bullshit or Not?

so... mr. gold timing bubble spotting rocket scientist, when did you sell nasdaq and buy gold according to your theories? those is us here since 1998 sold nasdaq in march 2000 and bought gold in 2001. you?

this is, by the way, a very simple 'yes' or 'no' question. let's see if you can answer it simply and directly.

If you can show some proof that you got more than a few gold coins, I'll answer you.

[metalman]

Re: Bullshit or Not?

For goodness sake. Don't you have a day job guy, rather than sit here and bat these same stale petty challenges back and forth every day? Work is slow right now?

trying to see if he knows anything... but then we already have our answer.

why on the site that told us the right times when to sell nasdaq and buy gold do we need some dimwit who did neither to tell us when to sell? you get something from netzero, i don't. but then you pay for fractal mumbo jumbo newsletters, so there ya go.

[medved]

Re: Bullshit or Not?

yeh, it's bullshit.

read taleb's fooled by randomness.

use of the word 'pattern' is a dead bs giveaway.

Actually, there are some simple explanations for these "patterns".

1. Obviously, we are talking about a non-linear behavior of some data. Whenever a human eye catches some local non-linearity, it means the second derivative is seriously above the noise level. At this point it is still too early to talk about the third derivative, because it is still buried in the noise. Finding it requires more data (and more data can require enough time to destroy the "pattern"). So, whatever is not linear is "parabolic". No big whoop. It is quite different matter to compare whatever second derivative parameters we can get from it. I would not go that far as to try to distill this into any useful conclusion.

2. We all know, how "bubble investors" behave. The higher the price, the more money goes in. It would be quite usual to assume (just a habit of using linear models), that the amount of money going in is proportional to some linear function of the price. Which brings us back to the unavoidable exponent. Trying to figure out any reasonable distinction between the "young" exponent and parabola (third derivative again) is pointless for the amount of data we can obtain.

[nero3]

Re: Bullshit or Not?

trying to see if he knows anything... but then we already have our answer.

why on the site that told us the right times when to sell nasdaq and buy gold do we need some dimwit who did neither to tell us when to sell? you get something from netzero, i don't. but then you pay for fractal mumbo jumbo newsletters, so there ya go.

Do you have a financial interest in itulip, like shareholder?

yes or no?

[metalman]

Re: Bullshit or Not?

If you can show some proof that you got more than a few gold coins, I'll answer you.

you can tell just me...i'll believe you without proof.

[cjppjc]

Re: Bullshit or Not?

I think I've figured out your game.

That was funny.:p

[cjppjc]

Re: Bullshit or Not?

I subscribed to Nichol's Fractal Gold report for the better part of six months.

Lukester. If I had a silver dollar for every time you started a post with that line. Better yet, if I had a silver dollar for every newsletter you subscribed to I'd be a rich man I think.

[metalman]

Re: Bullshit or Not?

Do you have a financial interest in itulip, like shareholder?

yes or no?

been around since the start... call me sentimental. making money does that to you.

that sentiment can change on a dime, know for sure. if gold peaks and itulip does not warn me near the top... not perfect, but not hanging on with the gold bugs or the stock bugs who watch cramer... the love is gone, baby, gone...

tough business this forecasting shit. get it right 11 years and miss one and... splat! :eek:

that's how i feel.

[nero3]

Re: Bullshit or Not?

been around since the start... call me sentimental. making money does that to you.

that sentiment can change on a dime, know for sure. if gold peaks and itulip does not warn me near the top... not perfect, but not hanging on with the gold bugs or the stock bugs who watch cramer... the love is gone, baby, gone...

tough business this forecasting shit. get it right 11 years and miss one and... splat! :eek:

that's how i feel.

I see. I tell you. In march 2000 I was not into investing at all and had never bought or sold stocks, and in 2001, I did not even have any idea what the price of gold was, that was certainly not something that interested me.

[metalman]

Re: Bullshit or Not?

in 2001, I did not even have any idea what the price of gold was, that was certainly not something that interested me.

that was the perfect time to buy it. now less so.

many gold 'bubble' calls by hacks have fallen by the wayside.

gold will be a bubble some day.

i trust itulip to tell me when. plus i think i can see for myself now anyway.

[cindykimlisa]

Re: Bullshit or Not?

been around since the start... call me sentimental. making money does that to you.

that sentiment can change on a dime, know for sure. if gold peaks and itulip does not warn me near the top... not perfect, but not hanging on with the gold bugs or the stock bugs who watch cramer... the love is gone, baby, gone...

tough business this forecasting shit. get it right 11 years and miss one and... splat! :eek:

that's how i feel.

Is this a yes or no?

[cjppjc]

Re: Bullshit or Not?

Is this a yes or no?

Don't bother:cool:

[Munger]

Re: Bullshit or Not?

I subscribed to Nichol's Fractal Gold report for the better part of six months. He's definitely a bit of a waffler. I was not impressed with the service, which was pricey and of dubious value. However unfortunately this observation and the question of whether parabolic patterns are "real" or not are entirely separate questions.

The pattern is indeed highly predictable, and you can certainly see it scattered everywhere in market history. Not sure why one would even bother to insist that a "parabolic spike" artifact does not exist, as it manifestly does - in many different markets. Efforts to disprove or deny this would appear to be time wasted?

Stocks. Grains. Commodities. Housing, South Sea shares. Tulips. Every sector can evidence a parabolic spike somewhere in history. Mr. Nichol's point was, once such patterns reappear and are already 50% sketched in, their trajectory becomes one of the most reliable patterns in evidence in the markets. "Patterns" are just the footprints of mass consensus opinion, or "mania".

Just as manias repeat through history with good predictability, so does the form of the parabolic spike. iTulip covers them routinely everywhere. What's the big deal?

And as for Munger's observation that the above comment represents TROLL-SPAM, I'm equally perplexed by that. Can't make any sense at all of this vague irritability, which is not making any intelligent point despite being irritated. The parabolic spike is OLD HAT. It is E V E R Y W H E R E in the markets. Seems some people here merely have some vague other itch, which they are yearning to scratch.

This is the problem with an overly "binary" view of things. To a binary way of thinking, if this analyst is concluded to be specious, then everything he argues must be specious as well (maybe they figure this is necessary for consistency). But of course the majority of the time even poor or specious analysis can contain parts which are perfectly straightforward and true.

Tongue-in-cheek reflection that Nero's signature is posting iTulip anathema. I was noting that perhaps the follow up to his own post was because it was not yet iTuliper-infuriating enough.

[metalman]

Re: Bullshit or Not?

Is this a yes or no?

u kidding???

used to have a forum here... they took it away.

not up to finster/bart/sapiens snuff.

sigh.

[Andreuccio]

Re: Bullshit or Not?

Lukester. If I had a silver dollar for every time you started a post with that line. Better yet, if I had a silver dollar for every newsletter you subscribed to I'd be a rich man I think.

I'd settle for a grain of rice for every word he's written.