Stock Pick Site:

Discussion in 'Trading' started by Aero5, Mar 17, 2002.

  1. TonyOz

    TonyOz

    No sorry, I don't know anything about them. I'd say GeeTO69 (and his close friends/relatives <joke>) probably know more about chatrooms than most of us :)
     
    #61     Mar 19, 2002
  2. BruceF

    BruceF

    Is shortboy.com actually making these trades? I couldn't find anything on their site that says so. Did I just miss it? Usually things would be a little clearer and exact trades would include the commissions, fees, etc. rather than just have simple prices.


    The only thing mentioning anything hypothetical is in their 'university' where it mentions a hypothetical shortbuy fund. But, I think they just mean that if they had a fund these would be your results.

    As Tony mentioned, I wonder why they would be trading a smaller and smaller account? When, in theory, the account should be growing.
     
    #62     Mar 19, 2002
  3. GeeTO69

    GeeTO69

    I will take your remark as a compliment because I know you meant it that way.

    :*)
     
    #63     Mar 19, 2002
  4. TonyOz

    TonyOz

    I definitely did. You are the chatroom Man. Okay maybe Rock can give you some competition there :)

    Edit: When I launch my chatroom, you will be the first to know, I promise :)
     
    #64     Mar 19, 2002
  5. tom_p

    tom_p

    I have not followed this debate very closely in the past (Babak, inclusion of interest, calculation of returns etc.) and just spent a few seconds only on shortboy's site. I notice

    (1) a profit of $7,540 on March 12, 2001
    (2) no mention of when the positions were opened

    Since the 3 trades concerned were all winners, couldn't it be possible that there exists a fortuitous combination of opening days which, together with the $7,540, do not violate the 2:1 margin requirements for a $100,000 account?
     
    #65     Mar 19, 2002
  6. TonyOz

    TonyOz

    It would still violate it. I already checked into that too :) 217.15>215.08 and 5900 > 2% drawdown per one position. They just performed poorly and changed the starting number after the fact. And the risk of having more than the entire equity (103K) in one position when they claim "low risk" I don't think so. Someone really messed-up there.

    Edit: And there may have been more open positions at the same time that we do not know about. Cuz all we know is closing date.

    I can't find any charts on EPG, but according to the charts and prices, it looks like CI and PGR shorts were open at the same time as DGX which he covered on 3/12. So it is possible that he had another 46K short at the same time.

    And besides, these are "RHETORICAL" returns. Not actual trades audited by professionals. This reaches a new level of snake-oil
     
    #66     Mar 19, 2002
  7. GeeTO69

    GeeTO69

    Tony I would be honored to be your first new member. Now that would be one hell of a chatroom!

    PS You should be nice to me, I got both your books (and I PAID full price for them) :-D
     
    #67     Mar 19, 2002
  8. jem

    jem

    Nice work Tony, now that you are done with Shortboy could you get to work on Enron and while you are at it could you tell me what is going on with the books at IBM.
     
    #68     Mar 19, 2002
  9. TonyOz

    TonyOz

    Note the words low risk! 103% of equity in one stock is low risk according to Sam. He can sleep at night having more than his entire equity short in one stock. Please don't insult our intelligence!

    With this last statement, this case is closed as far as I'm concerned. It was a pleasure interacting with you, but it's just not worth my time anymore.

    Tony
     
    #69     Mar 20, 2002
  10. Bono

    Bono

    wwatson1,

    pennysharesltd.com isn't my own site. I just contribute to it.

    Bono
     
    #70     Mar 20, 2002