Replies to post #17299 on Strategy Central

[mr_cassandra]

Morning, not taken that way at all.

What I'm trying to say is that I truly understand the issue but feel it may be more academic than real-world, in that all mvp's results have been made with that factor already in play.

On the other hand I like Johns idea to short mzz instead of going long mvv.

I think that all ideas like float, slippage, etc have their basis in a valid concept but each must always be put in perspective against the question: how are your gains 'despite' the problem.

Sometimes the concept(s) can assume a life of their own and gain size beyond the real-world effect.

I know one could say 'if I could mitigate this I could make even 'more' money' but I have a hard time getting behind this at mvp's current levels. If it were demonstrably turning say 40% into 10%, it would be a totally different story.

[mr_cassandra]

I just diligenced Johns idea and on one mvp trade I see shorting mzz at 6.9% versus 6% for long mvv.

This is enough basis to warrant more diligence on the actual numbers.

.9% time and again would have a huge effect in mvp, so if it holds up to diligence, this may be less 'academic' than I thought.