Nice to see you trolling after my posts lurefo, and after the way I thorougly kicked your ass on the ES Journal, I'm not even remotely surprised. I'll tell you what, Index "clueless" piker, if someone believes that fat fingers trigger market selloffs (like lurefo stupidly does) well then they would probably be better off using the concepts that you expouse here (which are the mainstay of investors who can't learn how to find a market outperformance edge). Otherwise, you're just the blind (clueless) leading the blind (stupid). IOW, Standard fare for ET. :eek:
Hmm. I'm not sure what I've done to elicit such malevolent drivel from you by promoting the logical case for passive investing. However I'm pretty sure it's a consistent character flaw borne of insecurity that somehow you feel the need to engage in name calling to defend your weak position. Shall I expect more baseless bluster on your part?
NO Why the conspiratorial conjecture? After all it stands to reason that since many people have come to recognize the superiority of passive investing over active, there should be more than one poster here entertaining that same concept. Truthfully, it seems some of you here appear AFRAID of the message by the nature of your reactions.
Yes I'm sure part of the appeal of trading is the same reason late night get rich quick infomercials are popular. Lots of need and lots of people trying to cash-in selling the tools essential for the pipe dream of huge sudden riches. Reality is a much harder and starker sell.
In the absence of a number and some documents, impressive most likely means something like: "We were down ONLY 10% while SP was down 20%". "That is double the SP"....