|
TranceAddict Investors Club @ Marketocracy (pg. 13)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Capitalizt |
| I have no answer for either question, lol |
|
|
| Purple |
You need a minimum of 3 plus years of trade records/logs .. do you have it?
Industry average is five years of trade logs though and that too has to be verified by your broker/dealer. Investor will contact your broker/dealer and verify that its actual money that was invested in these trades and you weren't doing demo trade.
Edit: Can anyone please update as to how many funds started at the beginning of this thread has gone bust till now? |
|
|
| Shakka |
| quote: | Originally posted by Purple
You need a minimum of 3 plus years of trade records/logs .. do you have it?
Industry average is five years of trade logs though and that too has to be verified by your broker/dealer. Investor will contact your broker/dealer and verify that its actual money that was invested in these trades and you weren't doing demo trade.
Edit: Can anyone please update as to how many funds started at the beginning of this thread has gone bust till now? |
I don't know about how many that were started this year, but at least 11 funds have blown up so far this year (and I expect several more will have bad news for their investors in the near future--particularly given the additional 2nd lien downgrades by Moody's yesterday).
http://hf-implode.com/ |
|
|
| Purple |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
I don't know about how many that were started this year, but at least 11 funds have blown up so far this year (and I expect several more will have bad news for their investors in the near future--particularly given the additional 2nd lien downgrades by Moody's yesterday).
http://hf-implode.com/ |
I was referring to funds started by TA members at another thread, some 15 days before the crash.. but interesting link you posted. |
|
|
| atbell |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
I agree there is a wave of socialism overtaking some areas of power, but I will always say that capitalism has always persevered through even the worst possible events. Inflation, war, depression, economic meltdowns, sickness, terrorism, etc. In every situation in which the free market economy was not the basis for a countries economy, that country has always fallen flat on its ugly little face. China wised up, and so did Vietnam. Socialism is usually a reaction to the ills that capitalism sometimes exhibits, such as income disparity between classes.
But besides that capitalism will always come out on top in the end.
But having a seemingly low risk tolerence, I can see why you like metals so much. I havn't ruled out buying up some gold or silver assets when I learn what is the right price to buy. |
Capitalisim has barely been around at all. Monarchies and theocracies have had a much better run then anything capitalisim has put forward.
China and Vietnam have both wised up, they've spent years studying the failings of capitalist systems and economies that have quickly switched thier economic / political system. Both of these contries are doing well with extremly socialist policies yet the US has been performing rather poorly compared to either of them over the last deckade.
What you need to watch for more then "socialist" aspirations are incidents of upheaval. For instance, large civilian populations who are armed and have very little respect for thier government ... who could that be?
Gold's gone up a lot in the past years, i've even heard people (maybe on this site) talk of 1000 $US ounces, which sounds as rediculous as 600 $ ounces did in 2002. |
|
|
| philliez |
| atbell, why is your fund private? |
|
|
| Krypton |
Well, I have deployed my secret weapon.
And it's called the Capital Ventures Fundamentals Fund. What's the weapon? The FUNDAMENTALS. All stocks within this fund have above average balance sheets and all have been maticulously screened. Each balance sheet has been scrutinized against 2 important benchmarks: insustry and overall market. Over time, these superior quality stocks will ANNIHILATE any of your portfolios. Diversification itself in a planned number of at least 65 stocks will shield me from heavy losses in any one sector and make for a soft landing in any market downturn. Fundamentals is the market force and I'm THA JEDI tapping into it.:cool: :cool: You'll see.
You guys are about to get stomped. |
|
|
| Capitalizt |
65 stocks? You gotta be kidding me. How do you track the fundamentals of so many companies?
I stick with no more than 5-6 at a time...a nice small basket of quality names, and a few commodity ETFs that I think should do well over the coming year as the fed flushes the dollar down the toilet. ;) |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by Capitalizt
65 stocks? You gotta be kidding me. How do you track the fundamentals of so many companies?
I stick with no more than 5-6 at a time...a nice small basket of quality names, and a few commodity ETFs that I think should do well over the coming year as the fed flushes the dollar down the toilet. ;) |
It's purely quantitative in its analysis. This is the ultimate test of whether my fundamentals spreadsheet that took me 6 months to develop really works. The more stocks, the more diversified, the chances to own huge gainers. I'm not worried about if the price is expensive or cheap. I just look at the balance sheet. Deciding which stocks to buy is harder the fewer names that you buy. It's harder because there are fewer, more risk, less chances to buy that one stock that triples in a year. Triple gainers are out there, but how easier is it to find one if you've got at least 65 QUALITY stocks. They're quality because quantitatively, the numbers show it.
Here's a little insider tip from inside my fund. Check out Tesoro Corp. (TSO). The balance sheet tells me the fundamentals are grade A. Upon further study of the balance sheet[Found Here], the company outperforms its industry and market. I'm not going to tell you though whether the price is cheap or expensive. Whoever wants it can make that decision:). Simply look at the numbers. Microsoft puts the ratios and data together perfectly with that little report generator. |
|
|
| atbell |
| quote: | Originally posted by philliez
atbell, why is your fund private? |
no idea, I'll look into it. |
|
|
| atbell |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
Well, I have deployed my secret weapon.
And it's called the Capital Ventures Fundamentals Fund. What's the weapon? The FUNDAMENTALS. All stocks within this fund have above average balance sheets and all have been maticulously screened. Each balance sheet has been scrutinized against 2 important benchmarks: insustry and overall market. Over time, these superior quality stocks will ANNIHILATE any of your portfolios. Diversification itself in a planned number of at least 65 stocks will shield me from heavy losses in any one sector and make for a soft landing in any market downturn. Fundamentals is the market force and I'm THA JEDI tapping into it.:cool: :cool: You'll see.
You guys are about to get stomped. |
I wonder if I'd just not invested in anything at all and kept my cash I might have been the top performer ;) |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by atbell
I wonder if I'd just not invested in anything at all and kept my cash I might have been the top performer ;) |
Maybe for a short time. Everyone got in when the market was having its hiccups. Marketocracy simulates investors depositing money in the best performing funds. So if your fund performs well, Marketocracy will infuse more money into your account to simulate more people loading up on a good fund. I always thought that was cool. |
|
|
|
|
