Recent content by jackolan

Suggest you reread the thread. Anyway... I only stayed for that one last... I'm gone... those interested in where to should take a look at my profile.

By "this guy" you mean new_trader?

OK, I give in. I'm casting pearls before swine and I need to stop. Bye.

Thanks for giving a sensible response and opening a dialogue as opposed to simply making blanket "you're wrong" statements. It seems to me that support in the FTSE100 occurs when the individual components of the index collectively reach their individual support levels. Thus, the FTSE's support...

By George, I believe he's got it. Yes... And support in the FTSE100 is support in the FTSE100... They are quite different things, applied in quite different ways with very different causes. EDIT: It just occurred to me (after tenbob's post above)... I am a little slow about these things...

You actually believe that a support level in Rio Tinto has a direct analogy to a support level in the FTSE100? Please, go ahead and lose your money... I'm happy enough to take it off you. I advocate that a newbie specialises in a single market, gets to know it's personality, it's quirks and...

I'm beginning to see why 95% of traders lose money. This completely fails to take into account that the market is not "mechanical"... it's built out of human dreams and fears. If you really think that someone buying bank shares in 2009 is no less fearful of losing their money than the same...

So you ARE agreeing with me then?... that in different markets (and in different time periods, e.g. before 2008 and after 2008) the "effect of gravity" is different. Just as the "effect of gravity" is different on the Moon and the Earth. What a shame you couldn't say that at the beginning, it...

Hmmm... so you are saying you AGREE with me that different markets are different and the same so called "laws" you have been not so convincingly talking about do NOT apply? I'm sorry, I thought you said earlier that switching markets is something that COULD be done because those that "know...

OK, here's a different example then... do you think buying a bank share has the same market dynamincs in 2008 and 2009 as it did in 2006? Do you think your 2006 strategy will net you the same gains in 2009?

Thank you for showing on this thread (as you have on others) that you really don't know anything. Of course the laws of supply and demand are different from market to market and time to time. You really think that buying IBM simply because MCD is rising is a good trade? Point proved.

Dr Kwame McKenzie : "Gamblers aren't all the same.Some do it for the money,but many casino gamblers do it for the thrill." I'd say if you are trading "for the thrill" then you are being "entertained"... if you are trading "for the money" but "get a thrill" then you are "investing". It's still...

I can't comment on the quantity of trades, but I am wondering why you hold them for so long? The longest I've ever held a position was a week, and that was because, at the time, I didn't know what I was doing! :D

Hmmmm... OK, there is definitely some ambiguity in his statement. However, if his meaning is your interpretation then it is too obvious to even mention (i.e. that an index can be invested in both long and short term). I would definitely agree with that. However, NTs posts always contain some...

Hmmm... I did say "I haven't tried".... Have you? Someone who makes a "naked" statement like this with no facts to back it up needs to prove that they have the experience and longevity before they can be trusted. From other statements I've seen you make on this Web site, I don't believe you...