Still going higher until we get that exhaustion.
26 Eylül 2009 Cumartesi
Today Post::A LESSON ON ATTITUDE
The most dangerous enemies of success are those that hide somewhere deep in your own heart and mind. Those who say that the want success and yet hang onto the attitude of failure are deceiving themselves. Almost all failure is generated within a person’s inner self, through their thoughts and attitudes. Looking through some history, Aristotle warned Alexander the Great that the most immediate dangers confronting his success were enemies within his own ranks. As you may know, the Macedonian army was rife with disloyalty, drunkenness, carelessness, etc. On an individual level, these actions could have been prevented by having a proper attitude.
Let’s fast forward to now. A few years ago, a survey was conducted by a life insurance company to determine why unsuccessful salespeople failed. Here were the results:
37% failed because of discouragement
37% failed because of lack of industry
12% failed because they didn’t follow instructions
8% failed because of a lack of knowledge
This should come up to 94%, and all four areas are directly related to individual attitude problems. Discouragement is caused by poor mental posture. Lack of industry is cause by a general bad attitude. Failure to follow instructions means you’re just lazy and have a lazy attitude. Finally, a lack of knowledge comes from a mix of everything above. Most of the salespeople failed because their attitudes broke down well before they even displayed their failures through their actions. It’s all about attitude.
In war, morale is the first defeat in any war. One side always loses heart before they are actually beaten on the battlefield. The side that believes in their ultimate failure will fail, no matter what other circumstances exist. A negative attitude almost always starts small and as you cling to it and believe it, it grows like a virus. When this virus gets to become so strong, it will overwhelm you until you break down. Sometimes, the psychological effect is so great that it can actually breakdown the central nervous system.
A good attitude doesn’t come instantly though. It does not come from solving one big problem in your life. It comes from solving a lot of little problems, proving to your mind and others that you can overcome anything. For example, if you are consistently losing on your trades, take it day-by-day and isolate each problem and solve it. You have to train yourself to believe in yourself that you can overcome the difficulty of losing. You will most likely lose if you think that you will lose on a trade before you even place the order.
The quickest way to go from a bad attitude to a good one is through taking positive actions. Theodore Roosevelt once told a crowd of politicians before a major vote in Congress, “If you want to be brave, then start acting brave.” He didn’t say, “have brave thoughts.” He clearly wanted action. You’ve heard that action speaks louder than words. Well, that applies equally to thoughts that lead to success.
You must take action to become better. You can’t make successful attempts without first beginning with a successful attitude, and only you can make that choice. Suppose that nothing goes right for you, still. Do you quit? Hell no. No matter what happens to you, you can turn the “bad” experiences to your good.
Some people wish they could always have things exactly the way they want. However, suppose you could always have your own way - you would never make a mistake, never be opposed, never know trouble or failure. And…you would never develop the strength that comes from opposition, for the feeling of exhilaration that comes from success. Problems can become your best teachers. Remember Edison? He tried over 5,000 times to make a light bulb that wouldn’t burn out without success. He learned something from each failure until he eventually succeeded. Even Shakespeare knew about failure when he said, “The best men are often molded from their own faults.”
Listen, whether something is a problem or not, it’s all in your head anyway. You have to realize that your life (and trading career) can be whatever you let it be. You don’t have to let every little failure be a total wreck. Instead, tell yourself, “If there’s to be trouble, let it begin here, and let me be the one to handle it.”
Apply these principles to your trading.
23 Eylül 2009 Çarşamba
Today Post::Just Food by James E. McWilliams - Book review
Where Locavores Get It Wrong and How We Can Truly Eat Responsibly
Published: August 26, 2009
Format: Hardcover, 272 pages
ISBN: 9780316033749
Publisher: Little, Brown & Company
“Eating local is not, in and of itself, a viable answer to sustainable food production on a global level”, writes Professor of History at Texas State University-San Marcos and award winning agricultural thinker James E. McWilliams in his visionary and thought provoking book Just Food: Where Locavores Get It Wrong and How We Can Truly Eat Responsibly. The author makes a compelling case, that neither locally oriented organic farming or conventional chemical based agriculture, can solve the intensifying global food problem. In their place, the book provides the groundwork for a more balanced approach that takes the best features of both agricultural systems, and combines them to provide a viable third option for solving world hunger.
James McWilliams understands that many myths and outright propaganda, surround both organic farming movement and conventional chemical based food production. The author points out that he is a long time supporter of eating ethically and of supporting organically grown food. At the same time, James McWilliams demonstrates that many of most cherished beliefs and ideals of organic agriculture are just myths. In that mythology, he includes the fallacy of calculating food miles and the mistaken belief that accepted organic pest control is safe for people and the environment. On the other side of the coin, the author takes conventional, chemical based production to task for its waste of resources and environmental degradation, and its emphasis on growing crops that are not intended for human consumption.
James E. McWilliams (photo left) recognizes that the discussion about food production has become very polarized with organic purists on one side and conventional agriculture supporters on the other. in order to break through this extreme division, the author proposes what he calls the Golden Mean, where he recommends combining the best features of local, organic farming with the best practices of mainstream chemical based production. James McWilliams provides evidence that local production, supported by who he calls locavores, can’t begin to meet the global demand for food that is rising with population growth. At the same tie, he describes how the solutions offered by conventional chemical based agriculture are scientifically, ecologically, and ethically bankrupt. This divisive situation, with neither side speaking to the other, is what the author addresses effectively in the book.
For me, the power of the book is how James McWilliams isn’t afraid to tackle the most controversial topics, and offer solutions that fly in their face of the conventional wisdom of both the organic and chemical based communities. For example, he sees the much maligned genetically modified plants and fish species are lowering chemical dependency, as well as lowering strain on depleted pastures by cattle. Indeed, one of his more stunning suggestions is replacing meat in the diet with aquaculturally reared fish. A very far reaching recommendation involves the elimination of all farm subsidies, which the author views as perverse and counterproductive for food production and actively encourage damage to the environment. The author’s purpose is to get people to think differently, from the polarized and antagonistic positions, of both organic supporters and chemical based agricultural adherents.
I highly recommend the challenging and often controversial book Just Food: Where Locavores Get It Wrong and How We Can Truly Eat Responsibly by James E. McWilliams, to anyone seeking practical and workable solutions to improving both local food supplies and for feeding the world as a whole. The author openly challenges the mythology that has grown up around food production from the increasingly polarized organic and conventional camps. The book provides a framework, and proposes real solutions, for taking the best of both worlds, while discarding the less desirable practices of both food production systems. In the end, the author hopes to encourage a balanced approach to addressing global food requirements.
Read the important book Just Food: Where Locavores Get It Wrong and How We Can Truly Eat Responsibly by James E. McWilliams, and discover a fresh approach to food justice and ecologically responsible production and eating. Not everyone will agree with the author’s conclusions or recommendations, but his sincerity and dedication to finding solutions to the world food crisis are unimpeachable. James McWilliams provides a powerful starting point for opening discussion between the diametrically opposed factions of organic producers and conventional chemical farming supporters. That worthy goal, if achieved, is a powerful first step toward feeding a growing world population ethically, and for maintaining the health of the environment as well.
Tags: Just Food: Where Locavores Get It Wrong and How We Can Truly Eat Responsibly, James E. McWilliams, agricualture, food production, environment, academic book reviews.
8 Eylül 2009 Salı
Today Post::MARKET COMMENTARY (9-01-09)
The SPX is in a neutral range. Today, the market established a 3rd point on the bottom range, giving the appearance of a bull flag with a 15 degree tilt. As long as the present levels hold, this is bullish. Another thing to note is that the market is forming a rising wedge…within a larger rising wedge as it can be seen on the 10-month chart. This is bearish for the intermediate-term. Therefore, focus must be placed on the high probability setups with the least positive correlation with the market.
! I’m pretty impressed by the community. You guys are playing the same stocks I’m playing…despite that fact that you don’t know what I am playing. I kind of calmed down on posting trades to see if it would make any difference to my ability to focus on my actual trade execution. There isn’t much of a difference, but it is time consuming so I’ll try to post what I can if time permits.
Some of you ask dumb questions. Questions like “Are you still going to blog when in school?”. Duh. I have 3 days out of the week free, too. In fact, I skipped my first day of classes to make 9% yesterday (and I’m sure you would too). Also, a few of you ask me questions with answers that can be found in my educational articles. Stop being lazy and get reading. I don’t have time to answer questions like that.
Finally, I’m looking at a variety of potential setups this week, most of which have been played multiple times over the past few months: [[AHT]], [[ANPI]], [[BCRX]], [[CIT]], [[CPST]], [[DVAX]], [[EDAP]], [[FITB]], [[HBAN]], [[HEB]], [[HGSI]], [[INO]], [[JAZZ]], [[MRNA]], [[NVAX]], [[OCLS]], [[ONTY]], [[QTM]], [[RPRX]], [[RTK]], [[SCLN]], [[THC]], [[UIS]], [[XOMA]], and others that may just randomly pop up during the day.
Note: I am NOT taking more students, so stop signing up. I have enough people for the next 2+ years, and I guarantee you that I won’t be doing this for 2 years.
Today Post::MARKET COMMENTARY (8-25-09)
Starting today, I will be extremely busy. I am preparing for my first day of school on August 31st. As you know, I will be starting a new shrink program. I have many, many reasons to do this, but I have no idea why I really chose to go back to UMD. I’ve been having recurring dreams for over a year telling me that I have to go “find something”. Who knows what that is, but my dreams or visions are usually correct. Say what you want, but I’m not crazy. I executed the delegation of my responsibilities in all of my businesses yesterday, except for my personal trading and anything that’s internet-related.
Most of you figured out the way I day trade. You see a lot of break even trades for a reason, and that reason is because I am testing out the market. I have to see what is working early on, and when I do, that’s when I go in “heavy” sometimes doubling or tripling my positions. It’s pretty simple if you think about it: find what works then heavily allocate your capital to the best ideas, thus maximizing your gains and limiting your losses. Winning almost everyday is not some kind of bizarre mystery or stock market “secret”…which also brings me to another point.
I still don’t get why people complicate trading with complicated and worthless indicators, computer programs, spreadsheets, or anything else that wastes your time. Here’s a tip - if you can’t even trade profitably and consistently off of the basics, then you’re going to run into major problems down the road. No method is 100% perfect, but make sure you perfect the basics first, then move onto other shit.
This post will be two parts: the usual SPX analysis and the biotech/pharma sequential breakout analysis.
First, the SPX charts in the following timeframes: 2-day, 5-day, 10-day, 1-month.
Now, I heavily day traded biotech stocks yesterday. By heavily, I mean that I was executing trades every 1-3 minutes which made it pointless for you to follow. I took the charts for BCRX, NVAX, SVA, INO, HEB, VICL, DVAX, and AGEN and stuck them all together into one image.
Yes, I know that some are not swine flu related, but they moved anyway, didn’t they? I could careless what you think and only care about WHAT is moving. I find out the WHY part later, after my trades are finished.
Click to enlarge
The long black vertical line marks the breakouts for BCRX and NVAX, which were the first breakouts of the group. Scroll down a little to INO. The remaining charts show sky blue boxes. These mark the delayed movements in the rest of the group where you only had several minutes to take action.
The long red vertical line marks the pullbacks for BCRX and NVAX. Note how SVA pulled back first, HEB kept going higher, and some of the others just didn’t move at all. During pullbacks, you want to heavily allocate towards the strongest in the sector, which was HEB (you can check out my twitter stream and assess how urgent I made it to get into HEB).
The area between the long black vertical line and the long red vertical line shows the breakout volume. Volume should and must be heavy for a stock to gain momentum, which reduces the risk of failure.
The area between the long red vertical line and the long green vertical line shows the importance of pullback volume. For most of the stocks, you should see lower, steady volume, which indicates a healthy consolidation zone. High volume inside this zone flashes a big warning sign of instability.
The period after the long green vertical line is mixed. You can see secondary breakouts in BCRX, NVAX, SVA, and VICL - all marked by heavy volume that should be similar to what you saw in the initial breakout volume area (between the black/red vertical lines).
Finally, chart patterns made sure that you got in at the right moment.
When you see 2 or more stocks in the same or similar industry/sector, then you must immediately scan and chart the entire group’s components. Some of my biggest plays are due to sequential breakouts which give you windows of opportunity to get into stocks prior to high-probability breakouts. Good examples were my end of April/early May oil/gas shitstock plays in XTXI, XTEX, APL, AHD, and a few others. I believe I wrote a post on it, but I’m not going to dig for it.
That’s your lesson for the day.
Today Post::MARKET COMMENTARY (9-3-09)
The SPX is back within the 990-1012ish neutral range. This is within a larger 980-1040 neutral range. I wouldn’t suggest trading the indices in such a tight consolidation zone.
Is it time to short? The easy way to answer this question is to break down the market by individual sectors/industries. I like to use the Select Sector SPDRs (XLV, XLB, XLK, XLP, XLI, XLU, XLY, XLF, XLE).
For the most part, each sector is within a neutral range and/or a rising wedge or channel. The XLF is the only sector that broke through it’s lower long-term trend line (out of 9). I do pay attention when 2-3 sectors start breaking down ahead of the market, usually a precursor to a major pullback. For now, however, I don’t see a reason to rush on getting short.
Today Post::MARKET COMMENTARY (9-4-09)
We’re still in a range, meaning, don’t go crazy trying to predict direction and more importantly, betting heavily on what you believe will be the future direction of the market. I have no idea what will happen which is why I take things day-by-day.
In the 1-month chart, make note of the orange ovals. This is where major breakouts and breakdowns have been occurring. Everything else is a waste of time.
Also, today is the last day before a 3-day weekend. There will be low volume making it not worth trading (vs. the regular days I trade).
I’ll be in NYC (Financial District) for the weekend. Have a good one.
Today Post::MARKET COMMENTARY (8-21-09)
I am overwhelmed by the response on my last post. Incredibly, with all the comments on the blog, tweets, and e-mails combined, I received north of 500 responses. I believe I made my point.
I will listen to the community and make every attempt to just “ignore” these idiots. The blog comments section, the @replies to my twitter, and the 100+ emails in my inbox are proof and testimonials of what I do, day in and day out. Who can say anything now? They can’t.
However, I do have unfinished business with one idiot who I will deal with in the future. I am just collecting and saving up my best ammunition to use against him. Sun Tzu said, “draw your enemies in with the prospect of gain, then take them by confusion“. I am waiting patiently for the most opportunistic time to attack. It will be extremely painful for him.
Now, adjusting back to my old self. The market remains in consolidation. Notice the broadening formation (funnel) on the 10-day and 1-month? However, also note the neutral range on the 2-month/60-min and 6-month daily. We are in a neutral range which does not warrant any significant action in terms of taking absolute sides. Just stick with trading the high-probability setups and you’ll be fine.
Kaydol:
Yorumlar (Atom)
