Sharechat Logo

Forum Archive Index - June 2004

Please note usage of the Forum is subject to the Terms & Conditions.

Messages by Date [ Next by Date Previous by Date ]
Messages by Thread [ Next by Thread Previous by Thread ]
Post to the Forum [ New message Reply to this message ]
Printable version

[sharechat] Phaedrus - Classic Hogwash

From: "Lazy Haggis" <>
Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 17:12:10 +0000

Re: [sharechat] PNA looking good?

Phaedrus Wisdom >>> " I was loath to draw any conclusions. Your questions 
are simply red herrings, designed to draw discussion away from your false 
claims." <<<

Phaedrus, unfortunately you did draw conclusions (see above based on your 
chart) and your reply clearly shows that you are loathe to answer my 
questions, not because they are red herrings, but simply because they expose 
the limitations of your analysis. The rest of your comments are waffle, 
because I did not raise any specific technical view, yet your very 
questionable response includes a specific technical view (your chart) which 
you deliberately chose in order to draw erroneous conclusions as though I 
had presented that chart myself. Shame on you Phaedrus, that's disgraceful.

If you had submitted that same reply to my scenario "PNA looking good" at 
high school level as an effective response, you would unlikely have received 
more than 3 out of 10, and you know that only too well. It was a very poorly 
thought out effort, and you are quite capable of much better analysis than 
that. I have seen your past efforts.

The reason you did not answer my questions were obvious. Depending on the 
various technical time slices chosen, there are different outcomes, 
typically uptrend or downtrend. It is also possible to have conflicting 
trends based on the type of technical analysis used. You selected your 
particular timeframe and chart analysis type because it conveniently served 
the purpose of concluding with your erroneous findings. Had you wished to 
conclude an uptrend result, you could have done so quite easily, and on 
increasing volume - you know that.

You surprise me Phaedrus. Look closer at the volumes. Over the period 
encompassing the most recent internal turning points (MACD and RSI) as the 
price rose from 15.5 cents through 17 cents the volume increased. You and 
your findings are totally incorrect. Furthermore, your reply and comments 
are red herrings deliberately designed to deceive those who are not 
technically minded, and typically used as a smokescreen from idiots who 
self-appoint themselves to pedestals.

To make matters worse Phaedrus, not only did you concoct an irrelevant 
technical view, you also totally ignored references to the US dollar chart, 
gold bullion chart, fundamental analysis, and the effect of other external 
factors such as terrorism, all of which effectively combine to produce the 
PNA technical view today - a classic buy.

I am not prepared to enter any further debate on this matter with you, as my 
point has been clearly made, and anyone can look over those time periods at 
will, however if you feel better within yourself, then please feel free to 
post whatever you wish. I'm sure there will be plenty of people who believe 
your simplistic technical nonsense. Don't annoy me again with such trivia.

Lazy Haggis
The Mumbo Jumbo Filter

Watch LIVE baseball games on your computer with MLB.TV, included with MSN 

To remove yourself from this list, please use the form at


Messages by Date [ Next by Date: [sharechat] Lazy Haggis Allan Potts
Previous by Date: Re: [sharechat] To Phaedrus re PNA Robin Benson ]
Messages by Thread [ Next by Thread: Re: [sharechat] Phaedrus - Classic Hogwash - not really Phyllis Bergquist
Previous by Thread: [sharechat] ON Topic, OFF Personal = Fair Debate Cristine Kerr ]
Post to the Forum [ New message Reply to this message ]