i know very little about ralph, but all i have heard has been very positive. i find your comments stating that TA analysts are part of the sales arm of brokers very interesting. basically providing the public what they WANT to hear. I did not think these firms actually traded based on TA, thanks for the information. here's something to think about--lets assume the society accepted witch doctors as legit seers. would prudential and others have witch doctors on staff to spin stock stories?? surfer
I'm not sure why you find this remark about TA analysts being a part of the sales arm of a brokerage house so interesting or unusual. Fundamental industry analysts are all a part of the sales/marketing arm of a brokerage or I-Bank. A Technical Analyst would also be part of that group, just as a Barton Biggs ( market strategist ) or a Stephen Roach ( economist ). They are all resources that provide clients with research and also one's that market the brand name of the firm. It's up to the client to determine whether or not there is any value in these resources, AND whether or not it might apply to their respective investment strategy. It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with your conspiracy "theory" of providing the public with what they WANT to hear, as you say. As for TA, if you think that the S&P locals in Chicago have no use for pivot points and their respective support and resistance numbers along with a few significant moving averages, you are sadly mistaken. TA is usually a trend following tool, and it requires discipline to follow it. Problem is . . . most people out there aren't very disciplined. They are highly emotional and are unable to plan a trade, and trade THE PLAN.
Prudential was not a trading house or money manager, but a brokerage. A lot of serious money is successfully managed and traded on the basis of TA. Just as it is based on a fundamental outlook....or both. Quacks and witchdoctors run loose in all fields. I don't think any half-way experieded trader would accept anyone or anything as a consistent seer of the future.
He has been consistently wrong in the last 5 years. It was long overdue.. However I am upset that he was fired as he was a great contrarian indicator. I am sure his new job will be at Joe Battipaglia's firm....
If you faded him,Garzarelli, and Battipaglia over the years you would have been retired by now living on your own Island. Battipaglia is an embarassment to the financial world. When he appears on CNBC, they should dress him in a red nose and clown shoes. Funny how he disappeared when the market got roasted yrs ago.....
I will give you the very best technical indicator I have ever seen. When marketsurfer posts here I know we are in a trendless stock market. And as the volume of his posts go up. I get ready for a trend. I suspect since we just saw one. He is probably doing well and about to suffer a set back.
I guess time was running out on his "DOW 20,000 in 2006" prediction. PRU pulled the trigger a little early based on his job performance. Its absurd anyone would feel bad for this guy. He must of thought it was coming everytime he cashed the check. Wouldn't it be nice to be paid large sums of money to be wrong?
I was with Kidder, Peabody back in 1980 or thereabouts when Kidder hired Ralph. Prior to that they had no technical analyst. After sufficient experience with Ralph and his techniques, we dubbed him "Ralph Makeupora". Very nice guy though. And in fairness, I have not followed him in recent years, so I don't know what his results are. OldTrader