AI
Wednesday, March 12, 2008 11:23:53 AM
Clark shot down that logic fairly hard over on the DNDN board.
The key is that the probability of success at the final has DECREASED.
The reason is this. The final look has less events. In THEORY this cancels the increased alpha. So the final should have the same chance of success.
But THEORY here uses a constant risk assumption. Not valid with Provenge. The Provenge curves show a late seperation. This means that late events help provenge more than early events.
Thus, in reality the power of the final has been reduced.
I really doubt you need to name names
The key is that the probability of success at the final has DECREASED.
The reason is this. The final look has less events. In THEORY this cancels the increased alpha. So the final should have the same chance of success.
But THEORY here uses a constant risk assumption. Not valid with Provenge. The Provenge curves show a late seperation. This means that late events help provenge more than early events.
Thus, in reality the power of the final has been reduced.
I really doubt you need to name names
Join the InvestorsHub Community
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
