[Mark1808]

[ QUOTE ]
4)With Buffet, yes, let's move on. While there were no recent offerings, the point I was brining up was that Buffet along with the other famously wealthy fundies have shown strong results with their trading, but their billionaire status is a function of the trading and as a function of their investment company and having a crapload of shares of those companies. Yes, he did grow those shares, but he wasn't some joe blow that took a td ameritrade account from peanuts to bling.


[/ QUOTE ]

Buffett started with $100,000 and is now worth $50 billion!!! He may have taken $30 million in profit sharing from his investment partnership but the rest of his net worth is entirely from buying stocks!!! He could have most certainly taken $100,000 and turned it in to billions in a etrade account because he did it it in regular brokerage accounts.

With FA there is no guarantee that even if you are right about value the market price will move there any time soon or ever! However there are market forces which include buy outs that tend to move stock prices towards their intrinsinc value. There have been many praticioneers of FA that were schooled by Benjamin Graham and they all had stellar track records. I see no such lineage in TA. I see no large accumulations of wealth from TA as we have seen from FA. I see more taxes and costs from TA than FA.

The guy who keeps asking what TA is asking avery insightful question. FAers can say to buy stocks selling for a fraction of what the company as a whole would be worth to a potential buyer and they can lay out parameters on why they think a stock is undervalued. There is no such rationale from TAers, there is support, resistence, trends and such but there is no one who can point to a set of variables that when they exist in a stock's trading will lead to abnormal profits. If there are lets see them.