01-07-2010, 08:48 AM
Paul, those are fair questions and I'll answer them.
As to why I didn't reply in the first quarter of the year--simple, as referenced in the thread--my computer was broken and it took 3 trips to HP to get it back and running.
As to what I'd suggested in retrospect-being privy to the information you and the other players had access to, well, I did. Here is the link to that "prediction." It's again, as I feel compelled to do, made in some detail--lettin' it all hang out--as detailed explanations and projections are far more difficult, interesting, and credible, and if proven accurate, mean a lot more. Fairly, it doesn't count as an annual prediction of course because, well, it's made well into the year as yours was. That link is here. You'll note by that time I too would be primed watching for a rally in the Dow, especially in nominal terms, restating a conviction that the bottom had been sounded. Errors again made, of course, as I underestimated how quickly we'd get to unemployment rates in the double digit range--but of course one is operating following moving goal posts. GM was leaving the Dow and Cisco was entering, which of course had an immediate impact, and past data was being revised and yet revised again. The index at this point doesn't even mean the same thing, and at this point it was obvious that a rally would be forced at all costs. I note that in suggesting that "the Dow means little to the economy" or some such. I understand that the U1 officially is estimated at 12.5 in october at this revision but haven't looked it up. Again I made a consistent error of being too conservative and optimistic. Again I'd suggest it was pretty good advice. If one were to compare apples to apples I think it would be hard in fact disingenuous to call any of that blanket "wrong." And again, as with the previous prediction, I feel quite vindicated that it was a good one, certainly best of class--which at this point may not mean much because it's the only one of its class. Of course you're welcome to see it however you'd best enjoy. I've made a lot of these calls and I'm sure if we dig far enough we can find something that was just flat off and bad thinking. Feel free, as I'm more than willing to learn from it. But to call any of these projections, including some of those offered by others arbitrarily "right" or "wrong" based on a deliberately and unrealistically narrow perspective is unfair, divisive, and misleading. And self-servingly so.
Here is the link:
http://www.punaweb.org/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=8581&whichpage=6&SearchTerms=year
Towards the bottom of the page. Sorry again to the rest of Punaweb. I mean I really am done. I do my best to avoid these sorts of issues. I join the chorus to shut this thread down. It reflects poorly on us as a community and a culture and isn't constructive.
http://sensiblesimplicity.lefora.com/
As to why I didn't reply in the first quarter of the year--simple, as referenced in the thread--my computer was broken and it took 3 trips to HP to get it back and running.
As to what I'd suggested in retrospect-being privy to the information you and the other players had access to, well, I did. Here is the link to that "prediction." It's again, as I feel compelled to do, made in some detail--lettin' it all hang out--as detailed explanations and projections are far more difficult, interesting, and credible, and if proven accurate, mean a lot more. Fairly, it doesn't count as an annual prediction of course because, well, it's made well into the year as yours was. That link is here. You'll note by that time I too would be primed watching for a rally in the Dow, especially in nominal terms, restating a conviction that the bottom had been sounded. Errors again made, of course, as I underestimated how quickly we'd get to unemployment rates in the double digit range--but of course one is operating following moving goal posts. GM was leaving the Dow and Cisco was entering, which of course had an immediate impact, and past data was being revised and yet revised again. The index at this point doesn't even mean the same thing, and at this point it was obvious that a rally would be forced at all costs. I note that in suggesting that "the Dow means little to the economy" or some such. I understand that the U1 officially is estimated at 12.5 in october at this revision but haven't looked it up. Again I made a consistent error of being too conservative and optimistic. Again I'd suggest it was pretty good advice. If one were to compare apples to apples I think it would be hard in fact disingenuous to call any of that blanket "wrong." And again, as with the previous prediction, I feel quite vindicated that it was a good one, certainly best of class--which at this point may not mean much because it's the only one of its class. Of course you're welcome to see it however you'd best enjoy. I've made a lot of these calls and I'm sure if we dig far enough we can find something that was just flat off and bad thinking. Feel free, as I'm more than willing to learn from it. But to call any of these projections, including some of those offered by others arbitrarily "right" or "wrong" based on a deliberately and unrealistically narrow perspective is unfair, divisive, and misleading. And self-servingly so.
Here is the link:
http://www.punaweb.org/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=8581&whichpage=6&SearchTerms=year
Towards the bottom of the page. Sorry again to the rest of Punaweb. I mean I really am done. I do my best to avoid these sorts of issues. I join the chorus to shut this thread down. It reflects poorly on us as a community and a culture and isn't constructive.
http://sensiblesimplicity.lefora.com/