Whoa, easy there. All I really need to say is, "it is what it is," but instead, I'll take the time to answer your questions:
(1) Re this stock being a bargain, its already proven to be a bargain for me. So cheap and up approx 100%. I don't understand your question.
(2) Re going back in time, to date, I continue to buy on the dips because I believe this one has a lot more coming. There is no need for time travel because personally, I'm still expecting at least 100% gains from here.
(3) Re the applicability of TA to co valuation, Barron's defines an undervalued security as a security "selling below its liquidation value or THE MARKET VALUE ANALYSTS BELIEVE IT DESERVES." As you can see valuation is not only based on fundamentals as you believe. Besides, I would have to say, I think I'm a pretty good analyst. Especially in this case.
(4) Re TA and the Dow Theory, I'd hate to have to reiterate the theory's commonly known "basic tenets," but to name just a few: (a) THE AVERAGES DISCOUNT EVERYTHING EXCEPT ACTS OF GOD; (b) THE PRICE OF STOCKS SWING IN TRENDS; (c) THE AVERAGES MUST CONFIRM; (d) VOLUME GOES W/ THE TREND; and (e) A TREND SHOULD BE ASSUMED TO CONTINUE IN EFFECT UNTIL SUCH TIME AS ITS REVERSAL HAS BEEN DEFINITELY SIGNALED. Yes, these principals are also the cornerstones of TA.
(5) Lastly, re there being many ways to trade the mkt, I couldn't agree w/ you more. That is why I find it so difficult to understand why fundamentals keeps being forced down our throats. Believe me, I already have my share of long-term stocks. Personally, I find them boring. I buy em' then don't pay attn to em'. Our stock is my source of action. My gamble. I treat it for what it is. A short swing investment. I think that you're the one arguing the either/or fallacy.
