Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

A Request to Blog Readers

Recs

23

December 12, 2009 – Comments (17)

I am writing this because this is the same principle behind why I rec a Caps blog post, and to why I add a Caps user as a Favorite.

I obviously read and rec the blogs of my favorite Caps bloggers (and I also add them as a favorite user). But I also rec blogs that I might disagree with, maybe even intensely disagree with, if the author takes the time to write a well-reasoned approach for their view. I tend to seek out opinions that are not only similar to my own, by opinions that are often very different. Nobody can predict anything 100% accurately (least of all me) :), and the truth / reality always lies somewhere in the middle of many viewpoints.

So I feel it is important to rec opposing views, as long as they are thoughtfully presented. Or more to the point, I will rec any post that I feel is thoughfully presented. I am making this case based on my view, and I hope you feel the same way.

Reposted from: A Request to Blog Readers

--------------------------------------------------

I want to talk a few minutes about bloggers connecting with readers, and for a blogger to get feedback on their message.

I think most bloggers take the time to write and post because of a desire to share. I think that is generally true, but it is certainly true in the case of myself. I have a certain viewpoint on the world and the markets, where we have come from, where we are and where we are heading. I want to share that viewpoint through Fundamental Analysis, Technical Analysis and Commentary. I want to share my thoughts, and hopefully start a good discussion. I want that discussion to turn into a sharing of ideas (and there has been a lot of that recently here, which makes me *very* happy). But mostly I want to share my thoughts and have it be heard and affect my readers in a meaningful way.

I am not interested in droning on and on, and posting just to hear myself talk. I am not interested in making diatribes (which I suppose is not strictly true. I have ranted occasionally in the past. I think a good rant is in order and useful once in awhile if it is used in context of a bigger picture). But most importantly, I am not interested in alienating any of you.

My mission is to write useful opinions that are considered meaningful by you, the reader. And the primary way to measure the success of this mission is through feedback.

There are several ways a blogger can measure feedback: number of pageloads, number of comments posted, number of feed subscribers, number of links on other blogs, etc. And that is all good stuff.

But there is one metric that I consider the most relevant: the number of readers on my Following List

Why do I consider this relevant / Why I become a follower on others blogs

When I read another blogs posts, I think to myself: "Was the post useful?", "Did it give me new information or an interpretation of information that I had not heard before?", "Did the author make a well thought out argument", "Was I entertained?", etc. If the answer to any of these questions was "yes", I add myself to their "Following" list.

I consider this the highest and most relevant form of feedback because it requires an action of the reader. It is not just click on to the next post, or a click to add the feed to bloglines or reader, etc. Adding to Following List is an active acknowledgment that the authors message is useful / meaningful by the reader.

Notice I did not say "Did I agree with everything they said". Some of my favorite writers and bloggers are ones that I *don't* agree with. Sometimes on the little things, sometimes on some very big things. But as long as the points are made from a valid viewpoint, (even if I don't agree with it) and they are not jerks about it, I find myself considering different views. And that is *always* useful. Being open-minded to either a wave count or a fundamental stance of the economy that is different than my own has helped me to become a more complete writer and analyst. And also see how I made my point at the end of the 3rd paragraph: But most importantly, I am not interested in alienating any of you.. I view challenging you as a very different idea. The former is meant spitefully, that latter is not. I do like to challenge and debate as long as it is constructive. I hate arguing for the sake of arguing.

And this is what I would like to ask of each of you:

When you read this blog ask yourself: "Was the post useful?", "Did it give me new information or an interpretation of information that I had not heard before?", "Did the author make a well thought out argument", "Was I entertained?", etc. And if they answer to any of these questions is "yes", then please add yourself to on my Following List.

This says to me exactly what I say to other bloggers when I add myself to their following list: "I find your message valuable".

And this is precisely the feedback I am looking for to know how well I am doing with the mission of this blog: Am I making valuable observations and performing valuable analysis for you, the reader.

How to add yourself to the Following List

First Click Here. The following list is the Google FriendConnect Module. Once you click on the Follow button, here are the three easiest ways to add yourself:

1) If you have a Google account (and if you use gmail, you do) this is by far the easiest. Just click on the Google Button and follow the instructions

2) Yahoo and Twitter. Many people use Yahoo and/or Twitter and these are also easy ways to add yourself as a follow

3) For those who are concerned about their privacy, OpenID is a more anonymous approach. You just need an email address. I have an OpenID account and it takes about 2 minutes to set up. Just go to http://www.myid.net/

So if you find my blog or any of my posts valuable, please add yourself to on my Following List!!.

Most bloggers tend to look at their Following Lists in a similar way as me. Here is a partial list of some of my favorite blogs. Please show your support on these blogs as well! (Some of them do not use the FriendConnect module, so you may need to follow based on instructions on their site).

Columbia - ***EW trends and charts********
GoodVibe - GoodVibe Market Vibes
Alphahorn - Alphahorn's Market Musings
Pat McNeill - Pat McNeill on Elliott Wave
Todd - Elliott Wave Principle: Stock Market and Forex Analysis
Salvador - myBullmarket Investments
PUGridiron - PUGridiron's Stock Market Analysis
Jman - Timing Timing Timing
EZ - EZCashDreams
Grand - Wave Principle
Pramod - Stock Market Masala
Blue Bottle - 5WAVES - The Home of Elliott Wave Analysis
Dave - The Tail does NOT wag the Dog
Temo1051 - Temo1051 Trading Blog
Filipe - Elliott Market Waves

And, as always, thanks for reading!!

 

17 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On December 12, 2009 at 6:20 PM, SolarisKing (< 20) wrote:

Alphahorn has a great blog right now on his fantasy of a two story house with a domed roof. He says it was built to fast and will fall down soon. ;-) He says he is 100% sure (wait a minute, nothing is sure!)

I rec (almost) any post that i read all the way through.If i liked it enough to read it all, then i show my appreciation of the author.

Hey binve, are you in ATPG? I was wondering if you had done some EW on it. . . It's bouncing between the 180 and the 500, which it has already breached repeatedly, and the Bolinger is tight with a buy signal for the PSAR. Also, MACD, ROC, and WILLIAM, are all looking like possible consolidation.
   Added to the probability of new production this year in the Gulf of Mexico, and next year in Poland (did i get that right?) Average Estimate next year $1.47 EPS.
  Trailing PE 16 and PB 1.6. . . .  well, you know. . . 

  Anyway, i must be bored. I know you are busy, and possibly won't find time to get with me on this.

-solaris

Report this comment
#2) On December 12, 2009 at 9:15 PM, binve (< 20) wrote:

SolarisKing,

Hey man, thanks! Yeah Alpha Has a great blog. I like his domed house theory, but I just like the market has one more trick up its sleeve in December before the bear market resumes: Options and Contradictions

I rec (almost) any post that i read all the way through.If i liked it enough to read it all, then i show my appreciation of the author.

Nice man! Exactly :) If a post was worth reading to the end, then it must be engaging and that is certainly rec-worthy.

I am not in ATPG, and had not seriously looked at it before (from a TA perspective) and had only cursorily looked at them 2 years ago from an FA perspective.

I went ahead and did a count. Caution: It is **very** speculative. There is not a lot of price history with it and so there is no long term trend defined. I urge a lot of caution with trying to read too much into it. But here is what I see (and it is pretty bearish).

My primary inclination is to call the rally done, but you can see my note in orange on the right, that this current pullback could be a bull flag forming. If that were the case and it did sucessfully break through the lower trendline, I would expect it to test the upper trendline.

FWIW :)

Hope that was useful. Thanks!!..

Report this comment
#3) On December 12, 2009 at 9:40 PM, ChrisGraley (30.30) wrote:

Maybe that's why I always seem to rec  your blogs as well binve. I'm not much for technical analysis, but your posts always seemed well thought out and you throw in just enough of the fundamentals to keep me interested.

I' don't usually favorite people for their blogs though unless it's because of them explaining why they picked a certain stock. I favorite people that have an investment strategy that I'm interested in. Even if I disagree with the strategy, I might favorite that person to get an idea of what another viewpoint is thinking.

Anyway that's +1 rec and +1 favorite. The favorite is long overdue because knowing what the technical stuff is like for metals will help me imensely! Not sure why I didn't do it before.

Chris.

Report this comment
#4) On December 12, 2009 at 10:06 PM, binve (< 20) wrote:

ChrisGraley,

Thanks man!! I really appreciate that!

Yeah, I think both Fundamentals and Technicals drive the market, and you need both FA and TA to understand the makret. If Fundamentals are the engine, then Technicals are the accelerator and brake pedals. You need both components to get anywhere.

The fundamentals are driven by macroeconomics and the technicals are driven by human emotion. Stocks can stay "overvalued" for far longer than they deserve based on greed and they can stay "undervalued" far longer than they deserve based on fear. That is why I think TA is so important, because if there was no emotion and everything was fundamentally driven, then the market would always be at fair value and there would be little volatility.

And that is why I appreciate your posts so much. You definitely think macroeconomically, just like I do. So I very much relate to your thought processes.

I' don't usually favorite people for their blogs though unless it's because of them explaining why they picked a certain stock. I favorite people that have an investment strategy that I'm interested in. Even if I disagree with the strategy, I might favorite that person to get an idea of what another viewpoint is thinking.

That is a good call! I find myself doing that too.

Anyway that's +1 rec and +1 favorite. The favorite is long overdue because knowing what the technical stuff is like for metals will help me imensely! Not sure why I didn't do it before.

Thanks man!! And LOL, no worries :).

Report this comment
#5) On December 12, 2009 at 10:16 PM, Tastylunch (29.54) wrote:

Binve I'm very happy to see MTAA become  such a success. 188 readers through feedburner (of which I am one ) is great!

I think wihtin a year you can easily geta  1000 or more if you keep it up or have a hot streak with your e-wave count. especially if one of the big xover blogs (like Mish) give you some love. Mish came from the Fool boards if you didn't know. :)

Way to go dude!

I have to admit the main reason I started blogging/pitching waste organize my thoughts and vent a little, sharing information became a happy accident. I never imagined my blog would be as popular as it's gotten. It did change how I write them though. :)

I freely admit I'm bit lazier with mine than i like to be, but my 7 day a week gig as an SBO limits what exactly I can do. :)

In CAPS I more or less rec people the same way you do.

I alwasy rec someone if they do original analysis, even if I disagree wiht the conclusion. I value hard work.

I also rec original thoughts when I see it. Sometimes a  two sentence blog or a link to  a story can be a very proftibale one if it brings my attention to something.

I know he/they aren't well liked here but I routinely rec IBDvalueinvestin adn EPSmomentum blogs. (I think they are the same person possibly?). Same with Portefeuille.

Momo players and Special opportunity players like Porte  are very underpresented on CAPS.

I do disagree with this

and the truth / reality always lies somewhere in the middle of many viewpoints.

that may often be the case, but there are some opinions that are so far from the truth it is useful to call them wrong..

If someone were to say (and I've seen similiar things said on CAPS) that PUMP.OB was worth 100 million and it had negative book value (while listing maybe 1 million in tangible assets) then I'd say their opinion is so far away from the truth that it matters not if the true value is in the middle of a range of zero to 100 million. :)

I do completey agree with your sentiment though. As an investor or trader, one must always be open to the idea of imcomplete knowledge, random chance and error. You have to have the right balance of humility and confidence (and emtotional detachment) to be successful. Which is why empirically validating your methods is important as it allows you to act confidentally without just relying on your gut.

Report this comment
#6) On December 12, 2009 at 10:57 PM, SolarisKing (< 20) wrote:

Well, i don't think i can embed a yahoo chart, but if anyone cared this is the chart i looked at.

http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=atpg#chart2:symbol=atpg;range=2y;indicator=ke_ud+ema%28180,30,499%29+sma%2810,360,60%29+psar+bollinger+roc+macd+wpr;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=off;source=undefined

As for 'original analysis'. I had some similar reservations as binve. The two year chart shows a long drop on the 500MA and though the 180MA looks to be rising the 360MA is dropping, and that gives me caution. Folks are saying NG is cheap, but i am worried about an after christmas crash, and am slowing down on picking and trying to set up for it without getting gun-ho.

ATGP is high beta, and if there is a crash it could fall much more than the index, i guess.

Saturday night and home alone. My girlie is at her mom's for xmas, and i am at the farm, because that's what i do. :)

Report this comment
#7) On December 12, 2009 at 11:12 PM, binve (< 20) wrote:

Tastylunch, Hey man! Thanks!

I'm very happy to see MTAA become  such a success. 188 readers through feedburner (of which I am one ) is great!

Thanks for the props and the subscribership! :)

Mish came from the Fool boards if you didn't know. :)

Yeah, I had heard that. I never knew him as a player though.

I totally agree with you on your plethora of reasons for reccing (and if I remember correctly, you did write a similarly themed post a year / 18 months ago?). Yeah, I do think IBD/EPS is the same guy :) And I agree, port's observations can be very insightful!

that may often be the case, but there are some opinions that are so far from the truth it is useful to call them wrong..

LOL! You know, I was thinking the exact same thing when I was writing the post, but I didn't say it :)

Thanks again man!..

Report this comment
#8) On December 12, 2009 at 11:21 PM, binve (< 20) wrote:

SolarisKing, Hey man. Yeah, there is a good case for NG for being cheap. I am much more bullish on the commodity at this point. Just from an oversold perspective NG looks now the way Oil did back in December. But most of the producers have been positive correlated with the stock market (and not with the commodity) and now looks exceptionally overbought.

UNG is a piece of junk, so unless you trade NG futures, I don't know of a good way to be in it at the moment...

Report this comment
#9) On December 12, 2009 at 11:42 PM, Tastylunch (29.54) wrote:

binve

don't think Mish ever played CAPS. he used to be a regular on the legnedary Macro Ecomomic Trends and Risks board

http://boards.fool.com/Messages.asp?mid=28157911&bid=114903

it's where he got his nickname I believe as his user name was Mishedlo.

http://boards.fool.com/Profile.asp?uid=11758255

Report this comment
#10) On December 12, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Tastylunch (29.54) wrote:

just be happenstance while reconfirming this, I found an old Mish post that was a classic Mish rant.

from

http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=24874098

The market is more effecient than central planners.
How many times does that have to be proven?
That does not mean there will not be booms or busts in a free market economy, only that they would be smaller and self correcting.

Furthermore one does not necessarily need a gold standard to have sound money. Just getting rid of the Fed, letting the market set interest rates, requiring 100% reserves on checking deposits and getting rid of fractional reserve lending would do wonders whether or not we had a gold standard or not.

Finally I am not a strict libretarian anything goes person. The government has a role - safety, the envirnoment, police investigations, national defense, are some examples where government can play a positive role (although on national defense there is a line between defense and offense and we have way too many times crossed it). Vietnam, Iraq, and Korea come to mind, and on the stupidest theories too (like the domino principle) or the belief that we can force democracy on a nation, blow up the place and they will shower us with flowers.

But putting faith in central planners and war mongers is silly. That is what has happened with the Fed and with all sorts of legislation promoting "ownership societies", GSEs, protectionist legislation, etc, etc. If the government had to raise taxes to fight that war it never would have been fought. Some how we have gotten to the point where year in and year out we can spend more money than we take in. Yet you defend the government.

Piss poor government policies in conjunction with central planning at the Fed is why both the dot com bubble and the houisng bubble got as huge as they did. Piss poor policies got us into Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, and WWI. All needless government sponsored wars. The one defensible war was WWII but that was largely a result of stupid government decisions in the wake of WWI.

In the wake of a bust, keynesian logic says to throw more money at it.
It is a logically failed policy. Trying to "fix" the dot com bust created an even bigger housing bubble. The cause of the great depression was too loose credit, too much speculation, etc. The cure simply can not be more of the same.

If you insist that central planning is better than the market at deciding what is needed then I can not stop you from believing in that fantasy. It is your fantasy and you are entitled to it.

Mish

Report this comment
#11) On December 13, 2009 at 10:59 AM, binve (< 20) wrote:

Hey Tasty, thanks man! Yeah I just checked out that board and it looks like 'sitkapacific' is still posting (which is Mike's company I believe). I wonder if it is Mike, or just somebody that works with him?. Very cool :).

And yes, that rant above and others like it is a reason why I am a big Mish fan :)

Thanks!

Report this comment
#12) On December 13, 2009 at 2:27 PM, RonChapmanJr (97.07) wrote:

I agree that reading and trying to understand opposing viewpoints is useful, but I never rec a post unless I like and agree with what the author is saying.  That's just me.  I never rec'ed a Goodvibe post for example, nor would I ever rec one from Devoish because I disagree with their basic premises. 

Report this comment
#13) On December 13, 2009 at 2:38 PM, binve (< 20) wrote:

RonChapmanJr,

Fair enough.

Report this comment
#14) On December 13, 2009 at 3:26 PM, Tastylunch (29.54) wrote:

I don't think it is Mike, Binve. at least the tone of his posts are very un Mish like. Maybe someone else from his firm?

http://boards.fool.com/Profile.asp?uid=36648581

I don't always agree with Mish, but I do admire his manner in which he expresses himself and the way he formulates his arguments.

Report this comment
#15) On December 13, 2009 at 3:39 PM, binve (< 20) wrote:

Tasty,

I don't always agree with Mish, but I do admire his manner in which he expresses himself and the way he formulates his arguments.

Same here man. He is one of the reasons why I wrote this point in my original post this way

Notice I did not say "Did I agree with everything they said". Some of my favorite writers and bloggers are ones that I *don't* agree with. Sometimes on the little things, sometimes on some very big things. But as long as the points are made from a valid viewpoint, (even if I don't agree with it) and they are not jerks about it, I find myself considering different views.

We obviously have differing views on inflation / deflation (I tend to think Steve Saville is much closer to the truth), but I agree 100% with his unemployment observations and the ramifcations for the larger economy and the stock market (that we will be resuming the bear market in the not too distant future).

Thanks man :)

Report this comment
#16) On December 15, 2009 at 8:59 AM, TMFBabo (100.00) wrote:

I agree with RonChapmanJr; I only rec if I agree with the post.  You can write a detailed 2000 word post on why 3 + 3 = 5, but I would never rec that post.  That's actually how I see some of the blog posts here, no matter how well-researched, so I can't get myself to rec those.

Report this comment
#17) On December 15, 2009 at 9:55 AM, binve (< 20) wrote:

bullishbabo,

I agree that there are blogs with factual errors, and those should not be recced.

However, I also argue that what some people see as indisputably factual, often isn't: Regarding Economic Debates and Opinions: The Fallacy of "Purely Objective" Analysis - http://caps.fool.com/Blogs/ViewPost.aspx?bpid=305849

Here is a very charged topic, one in which there is great disagreement: Gold is money.

I put together a very long detailed post (no rants, as little of my own opinion as I reasonably could) about why gold is money: how it has been hisotrically, still feautres the 5 key properties that money should exhibit, etc. The Gold Blog. Gold/Silver/GSMs (and a little Oil for good measure) - http://caps.fool.com/Blogs/ViewPost.aspx?bpid=258723

I believe that it is a well-reasoned and well-reasearched post and does show that 3+3=6

However, a gold bear will take one look at my post, call it BS and say "he is showing that 3+3=5. Gold is NOT money".

I actually think there are very few examples where 3+3=6 and it is universally accepted when it comes to economic valuations.

My $0.05, or was it $0.06? What's 3+3 again? ... :)

Thanks for the comment.

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement