GregB is currently ranked 350 out of 15872 investors in the current Wall Street Survivor contest - Traders Wanted - Play $50,000 Stock Trading Game
This is the third time I have selected 5 stocks from the HingeBuy list as longs and 5 stocks from the HingeSell list as shorts the night before a contest opened and held the picks with no trades. The outcome has been the same in all three contests, the results are in the top 5%.
Isn’t time that you used information that could power top-ranked investing results? This is the power of the automated HingeBull and HingeBear selection process that is integrated in the FREE HingeScreen product.
One of the primary beliefs of the founders of HingeFire is that investors do not need $3000 seminars to be successful in the market. Investors simply need the tools to provide an edge in the market and a community of like-minded investors to work with. The objective of HingeFire is to build the tools and community to enable the success of investors at all levels.
I will confess that my results when I try to simply pick stocks that are “hot” or I got a “tip from a friend on" – are dismal. This is why it is important to use tools that can objectively screen the universe of stocks to define the stocks with the most potential. Start using the HingeFire stock screener today and get the information that will give you this type of edge on the market.
Disclosure: These stocks have been selected in a fantasy stock selection contest. They are not held in my real portfolio. Investing involves risk. Your results using software screening informational tools may vary. Proper portfolio diversification is important and any outlined investments may not be appropriate for your financial objectives or risk tolerance. This is not a solicitation to buy or sell securities.
Sunday, June 29, 2008
Friday, June 27, 2008
The Independent Trader Crash Course
Over $300 of Trading Lessons, FREE through July 8!
Click Here to Get Your Free Lessons
More About the Independent Trader Crash Course
You've heard them say, "Buy low, sell high." You've also heard, "The trend is your friend." Then there's, "Don't fight the Fed" and many other age-old trading principles.
But have you ever actually tried to live by them? If so, you know that it's easier said than done. Because, for example, how do you know if you're really buying "low" and selling "high"?
Elliott Wave International, the world's largest market forecasting firm, has released 5 unique reports and videos that can help you bridge the gap between the theory of wise adages and the practice of benefiting from them.
The Independent Trader Crash Course compiles over 4 years of the best trading lessons from Elliott Wave International with 64 pages and 17 minutes of insightful online videos that you simply cannot get anywhere else.
These five reports and supplemental videos will reveal to you several key techniques of analysis, forecasting and risk-management that are tailored to fulfill one purpose: make you a better trader.
Click Here to Get Your Free Lessons
Click Here to Get Your Free Lessons
More About the Independent Trader Crash Course
You've heard them say, "Buy low, sell high." You've also heard, "The trend is your friend." Then there's, "Don't fight the Fed" and many other age-old trading principles.
But have you ever actually tried to live by them? If so, you know that it's easier said than done. Because, for example, how do you know if you're really buying "low" and selling "high"?
Elliott Wave International, the world's largest market forecasting firm, has released 5 unique reports and videos that can help you bridge the gap between the theory of wise adages and the practice of benefiting from them.
The Independent Trader Crash Course compiles over 4 years of the best trading lessons from Elliott Wave International with 64 pages and 17 minutes of insightful online videos that you simply cannot get anywhere else.
These five reports and supplemental videos will reveal to you several key techniques of analysis, forecasting and risk-management that are tailored to fulfill one purpose: make you a better trader.
Click Here to Get Your Free Lessons
Introducing the Hinge Awards for inferior financial reporting
Every week brings its own set of inane articles in the financial press. The time has arrived to start awarding prizes for the worst examples of mainstream financial articles. Maybe in some small way this will help enable the improvement in business reporting, however unlikely the probability.
To kick this off, a set of three Hinge Awards have been created that will be presented quarterly. Naturally none of these awards are for excellence in financial reporting; in fact they are to outline examples of inferior business press.
The three categories for the Hinge Awards are provided below:
HingePitch – an article which is really a disguised pitch for a company, product, or service while pretending to give useful information. These pitches are common in the industry. Nearly 20% of the articles read in the mainstream financial media are effectively "paid-for" placement pieces. However some of these articles perform such a commendable pitch for a product while pretending to be an unbiased neutral resource that they are worthy of an award - especially if the product or service is really not in the best interest of most consumers.
HingeDuh – awarded for personal finance article where the information is obvious even to the most dimwitted consumer. The majority of these articles of fluff pieces containing meaningless quotes from selected "subject matter experts" with the simple objective of enabling the article to be at least an entire page long. Leading to the immediate question - don't the editors have something more meaningful for these business mavens to be writing about.
HingeCrock – the underlying facts are absolutely wrong in the article or the conclusions make no economic sense. Many of these articles use the selectable parsing of "facts" to slant the conclusions towards a designated point of view. A vast majority are politically oriented and have a pre-selected bias. Most turn plausible financial ingredients into inedible economic gruel.
Send your nominations to gregb@hingefire.com
Please list the award category in the subject header.
To kick this off, a set of three Hinge Awards have been created that will be presented quarterly. Naturally none of these awards are for excellence in financial reporting; in fact they are to outline examples of inferior business press.
The three categories for the Hinge Awards are provided below:
HingePitch – an article which is really a disguised pitch for a company, product, or service while pretending to give useful information. These pitches are common in the industry. Nearly 20% of the articles read in the mainstream financial media are effectively "paid-for" placement pieces. However some of these articles perform such a commendable pitch for a product while pretending to be an unbiased neutral resource that they are worthy of an award - especially if the product or service is really not in the best interest of most consumers.
HingeDuh – awarded for personal finance article where the information is obvious even to the most dimwitted consumer. The majority of these articles of fluff pieces containing meaningless quotes from selected "subject matter experts" with the simple objective of enabling the article to be at least an entire page long. Leading to the immediate question - don't the editors have something more meaningful for these business mavens to be writing about.
HingeCrock – the underlying facts are absolutely wrong in the article or the conclusions make no economic sense. Many of these articles use the selectable parsing of "facts" to slant the conclusions towards a designated point of view. A vast majority are politically oriented and have a pre-selected bias. Most turn plausible financial ingredients into inedible economic gruel.
Send your nominations to gregb@hingefire.com
Please list the award category in the subject header.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
This week’s trite “that’s obvious” personal finance article
Every week a slew of personal finance articles appear in the mainstream press across the county. Many of these articles don’t go beyond what should be obvious to even what a consumer with a very low IQ should intuitively understand. You would hope that the “hard-hitting” financial news media would be able to provide useful information with some depth instead of the junk that is put out as meaningful financial reporting in this era.
In a world ruled by 30 second sound bites, it is easy to understand why not all articles are lengthy. At least consumers could hope that they could make points that are not obvious even to the most dimwitted.
With the continual pile of trite articles put out each week, maybe there is a need to establish an award for the most useless personal finance article of the week – sort of an Ig Nobel prize for personal finance. As long as they don’t name the trophy after me I would be quite content to see this happen.
This week’s winner would be a gem from U.S.News & World Report titled “Tips on Selling an Unloved SUV”. The article makes the obvious points of:
- Sell to individuals, not dealers.
- Don’t strip the bells and whistles from the SUV.
- Lower your price.
- Wait for winter to sell.
Where is Captain Obvious when we need him?
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Sticking it to investors: SEC does not want to hold Credit Rating agencies accountable for their ratings
So what does a regulator do went they find out that the credit ratings applied to money market accounts are basically meaningless? Do they:
A) Get tough with the credit rating agencies and demand that they properly evaluate and grade interest bearing instruments.
B) Open the credit rating market up to new companies, hoping that the competition fosters an improvement in credit ratings.
C) Propose reducing reliance on credit ratings, including proposing to eliminate a requirement that money market funds hold highly-rated securities.
If you selected C then congratulations - you are a winner. The SEC is moving forward with a policy of weaning investors and Wall Street institutions from over-reliance on credit ratings, instead of fixing the credit rating firms. While the proposal does require that fund managers assess a security's liquidity and inform investors, we have seen quickly a formerly-liquid credit market can lock up. The major focus is to deemphasize credit rating agencies and effectively get them off-the-hook for the terrible job they have done in terms of properly rating securities. There is no need for the agencies to reform their processes.
Worst yet, investors are now basically being told that they are on their own when if comes to evaluating the safety of money market funds and interest-bearing funds. This is setting the table for a future crisis. At some point in the future there will be a large number of grandmothers spread across the nation who will be quite unhappy with this change in regulatory mindset.
SEC proposes reduced reliance on credit raters
A) Get tough with the credit rating agencies and demand that they properly evaluate and grade interest bearing instruments.
B) Open the credit rating market up to new companies, hoping that the competition fosters an improvement in credit ratings.
C) Propose reducing reliance on credit ratings, including proposing to eliminate a requirement that money market funds hold highly-rated securities.
If you selected C then congratulations - you are a winner. The SEC is moving forward with a policy of weaning investors and Wall Street institutions from over-reliance on credit ratings, instead of fixing the credit rating firms. While the proposal does require that fund managers assess a security's liquidity and inform investors, we have seen quickly a formerly-liquid credit market can lock up. The major focus is to deemphasize credit rating agencies and effectively get them off-the-hook for the terrible job they have done in terms of properly rating securities. There is no need for the agencies to reform their processes.
Worst yet, investors are now basically being told that they are on their own when if comes to evaluating the safety of money market funds and interest-bearing funds. This is setting the table for a future crisis. At some point in the future there will be a large number of grandmothers spread across the nation who will be quite unhappy with this change in regulatory mindset.
SEC proposes reduced reliance on credit raters
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Who wants to buy Circuit City?
An earlier summary regarding Circuit City outlined how all of the vultures that have been sitting on the sideline would be drawn out once Blockbuster started bidding. It is time to either fish or cut bait for all other potential suitors.
An article from Reuters today stated that Circuit City has received buyout interest from several strategic and financial bidders. A sale is expected to be announced over the next month.
The only question at this point is how much the carcass of this poorly managed electronics retailer will go for? I believe that many long suffering stockholders will be sadly disappointed at the price.
An article from Reuters today stated that Circuit City has received buyout interest from several strategic and financial bidders. A sale is expected to be announced over the next month.
The only question at this point is how much the carcass of this poorly managed electronics retailer will go for? I believe that many long suffering stockholders will be sadly disappointed at the price.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)