Replies to post #9936 on A.I.M. Users Bulletin Board (AIMUSERS)

[AIMster]

In any case, the stop loss in Reverse Scale is a protection measure, something that is lacking in AIM, apart from your own good sense.

Qarel,

Point taken, especially in these days of Enron, WorldCom, etc. I feel that this risk of AIM "scale trading" can be substantially reduced using Exchange-traded funds. It's less likely that a fund consisting of multiple companies can ever get to a $0 value the way a single company can. The worst that could happen here I think, would be like last year when Barclays closed their Internet ETF. Even then, though, one would have been paid something from the liquidation process.

Best,

Patrick

[aaCharley]

Lets see what happens if you start at $20, and the stock gets up to $45, and then drops to $30. At $45 the chart shows you have 105 shares, total invested is $2,980, $1,500 is you own money,$1,480 borrowed. The price drops to $30, and you sell all the stock for $3150. After paying back the margin, you have $1670. Your return on the $1500 is 11%.

The only Attack I was doing is that Glett was not showing the negatives, of his system. We also did not account for interest on the shares borrowed. I think most of the time the broker house will make more money than you will, which is how they stay in business.

Then posted was this:

Hi LC, it is always good to check for the worst case scenario. And of course not all stocks in a basket would suffer from a worst case scenario.

The problem is that this is not the Worst Case Scenario. The example demonstrated a gross profit (not cagr) of only 11% after having the stock price increase by 125% while it was held and after selling out at a price that was 50% greater than the initial entry. If selling stocks after a 50% gain is the Worst Case, pick my stocks to buy, Please.

Charley