CIB ==> The Triple H Winner

[mrmarket]

what it boils down to is your strategic plan and your discipline. I see it as letting your money ferment over time without maximizing your opportunities. You and I have had this ongoing dialogue for a number of years Ernie. I could have turned that same money into much more than 14 % over the same 2 1/2 years. I guess it's what makes a horse race. I like to maximize my opportunities and keep things fluid. But to each his own. No problem in questioning one's logic.

I think that if the stock you own outperforms the S&P Index over the identical period that you owned it, then it makes sense to have held it.

Especially, if the stock you owned had a lower P/E or lower Beta than the S&P 500 - then it made more sense to own it since your risk was lower than the overall market.

[Deaddog]

No one ever went broke taking a profit..

Yabbut; If you take your profits early and refuse to sell a stock at a loss (until they stop trading or get taken over) and don’t have a strategy to size your positions, I can see going broke as a distinct possibility.

As for outperforming the S&P, I would think that argument valid only when the S&P has positive returns.

[skiracer]

I think that if the stock you own outperforms the S&P Index over the identical period that you owned it, then it makes sense to have held it.

Especially, if the stock you owned had a lower P/E or lower Beta than the S&P 500 - then it made more sense to own it since your risk was lower than the overall market.

with me it comes down to keeping your money fluid and making money with the money. It is also a matter of controlling the trade vs letting the position control you. When you are waiting for something to happen it becomes wishing and hoping as opposed to having a plan and sticking to that plan. And with me that plan always involves an exit strategy regarding a stop loss point. I don't buy into your argument Ernie but it always comes down to "it's your money". Whether it makes sense to me is only my opinion. You know I wish you and everyone else here nothing but the best regardless what you do with your money.

[mrmarket]

Yabbut; If you take your profits early and refuse to sell a stock at a loss (until they stop trading or get taken over) and don’t have a strategy to size your positions, I can see going broke as a distinct possibility.

As for outperforming the S&P, I would think that argument valid only when the S&P has positive returns.

I'm not sure I agree on the latter. In the long run, the stock market always goes up so outperforming the stock market is pretty darn good.

If you're smart enough to avoid the stock market when it has negative returns then you're on to something that's worth a lot more than just being able to pick stocks.

[mrmarket]

with me it comes down to keeping your money fluid and making money with the money. It is also a matter of controlling the trade vs letting the position control you. When you are waiting for something to happen it becomes wishing and hoping as opposed to having a plan and sticking to that plan. And with me that plan always involves an exit strategy regarding a stop loss point. I don't buy into your argument Ernie but it always comes down to "it's your money". Whether it makes sense to me is only my opinion. You know I wish you and everyone else here nothing but the best regardless what you do with your money.

Ski...I know you well enough now that you are always trying to impart your wisdom on all of us. We all appreciate it 100 fold.

The bottom line is that there is more than one way to skin a cat. There has to be, because everyone has different risk tolerances and preferences. Not sure any one is better than the other. There are millions of people who love getting 0.5% in their savings accounts because they can't stand the thought of ever seeing their hard earned money lose any value at all. That's not my cup of tea, but no one should judge these people because we don't walk in their shoes.

[skiracer]

Ski...I know you well enough now that you are always trying to impart your wisdom on all of us. We all appreciate it 100 fold.

The bottom line is that there is more than one way to skin a cat. There has to be, because everyone has different risk tolerances and preferences. Not sure any one is better than the other. There are millions of people who love getting 0.5% in their savings accounts because they can't stand the thought of ever seeing their hard earned money lose any value at all. That's not my cup of tea, but no one should judge these people because we don't walk in their shoes.

couldn't agree more Ernie. and I never judge anyone, only myself. but I like to see and try to appreciate other logic which sometimes I fail to understand.

[jiesen]

what it boils down to is your strategic plan and your discipline. I see it as letting your money ferment over time without maximizing your opportunities. You and I have had this ongoing dialogue for a number of years Ernie. I could have turned that same money into much more than 14 % over the same 2 1/2 years. I guess it's what makes a horse race. I like to maximize my opportunities and keep things fluid. But to each his own. No problem in questioning one's logic.

Absolutely no problem with that, Ski! I wouldn't put it out there if I didn't want you and everyone else to call me out on logic that doesn't make sense to you. I know you, and truly appreciate that you're only looking out for me.

That said, your argument doesn't change my mind about how I go about trading my stocks (yet). It supposes a couple things that don't really apply in my case.

First, you are essentially saying that you can produce >19% returns every 2.5 years on all of your money all the time, which I have no doubt is true, given your technical trading prowess. While I truly wish I had such skill, I am fairly confident that if I attempted to trade stocks based on charts for the short term profits, I would have either much smaller returns than yours, or more likely an overall losing track record. Maybe I would learn, and improve my skill over time, but it would be an unacceptably expensive lesson for me.

Second, even if I could improve my overall returns by trading more frequently and with tight, well-thought out risk/reward plays on dozens of my own picks (instead of simply going with the market and/or $$$MR MARKET$$$ like I do) the difference probably wouldn't be worth the amount of effort I'd need to put into it. I simply don't have enough saved up yet to where I'd be better off working those extra hours on trading, rather than just working harder at my job for more pay. Maybe (and hopefully) that will change over time, and I can focus more on investing and less on working when I get older and richer. But for now, I am just not as well-endowed financially as I'd need to be so that an additional few % return is worth what I'd need to do to get it.

[skiracer]

Absolutely no problem with that, Ski! I wouldn't put it out there if I didn't want you and everyone else to call me out on logic that doesn't make sense to you. I know you, and truly appreciate that you're only looking out for me.

That said, your argument doesn't change my mind about how I go about trading my stocks (yet). It supposes a couple things that don't really apply in my case.

First, you are essentially saying that you can produce >19% returns every 2.5 years on all of your money all the time, which I have no doubt is true, given your technical trading prowess. While I truly wish I had such skill, I am fairly confident that if I attempted to trade stocks based on charts for the short term profits, I would have either much smaller returns than yours, or more likely an overall losing track record. Maybe I would learn, and improve my skill over time, but it would be an unacceptably expensive lesson for me.

Second, even if I could improve my overall returns by trading more frequently and with tight, well-thought out risk/reward plays on dozens of my own picks (instead of simply going with the market and/or $$$MR MARKET$$$ like I do) the difference probably wouldn't be worth the amount of effort I'd need to put into it. I simply don't have enough saved up yet to where I'd be better off working those extra hours on trading, rather than just working harder at my job for more pay. Maybe (and hopefully) that will change over time, and I can focus more on investing and less on working when I get older and richer. But for now, I am just not as well-endowed financially as I'd need to be so that an additional few % return is worth what I'd need to do to get it.

Makes sense to me Jiesen. never hurts to understand and learn new ideas and concepts.