i just bought $15k of Jones Soda stock - Page 2

zombies kill · #11 07-12-2007, 01:20 PM

yeah i am not at all sure what i am going to do with the stock exactly, but i will at least definitely be in and out of it in large amounts over the next year or so. im not totally advocating staying longterm in it, i just see a lot of upside.

hawk59 · #12 07-12-2007, 02:16 PM

[ QUOTE ]
yeah i am not at all sure what i am going to do with the stock exactly, but i will at least definitely be in and out of it in large amounts over the next year or so. im not totally advocating staying longterm in it, i just see a lot of upside.

[/ QUOTE ]

THEY NEED TO EARN $50 MM IN PROFITS JUST TO JUSTIFY THE CURRENT PRICE....THEY HAD $40MM IN REVS LAST YEAR. DO YOU THINK YOU CANNOT FIND BETTER BETS OUT OF 10,000 STOCKS IN THE US????

zombies kill · #13 07-13-2007, 01:49 AM

then i guess ill assume you did the painfully obvious move and sold it short when it was at $32 4 months ago. you did, right?

jws43yale · #14 08-03-2007, 10:09 AM

JSDA is now down to $11.28 down from over $16 when OP posted. Looking more and more like investors are accepting reality and bringing its PE down to a more reasonable level.

Nicholasp27 · #15 08-03-2007, 10:17 AM

man, i love jones soda Orange & Cream soda...if it didn't cost like $1/bottle at the store, I'd buy it all the time; if they sold 12-packs of orange & cream for within $1 of coke/pepsi 12-packs, then i'd buy them often

erac22 · #16 08-03-2007, 11:48 AM

oops, down over 20% today. Looked like it had a support level at 14, but it tore through it. Next support looks to be at around 8. Fundamentally, no debt is good, and 35% of the float is short, which is bullish, but with a forward P/E of over 30 I'd say it's still overvalued. I wouldn't be buying this one yet.

DcifrThs · #17 08-03-2007, 01:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
oops, down over 20% today. Looked like it had a support level at 14, but it tore through it. Next support looks to be at around 8. Fundamentally, no debt is good, and 35% of the float is short, which is bullish, but with a forward P/E of over 30 I'd say it's still overvalued. I wouldn't be buying this one yet.

[/ QUOTE ]

i just wanna take a second here and say this is why i laugh at supports. MMAP can generate price charts that technical analysis will come back and say " here are support levels based on previous trading" etc.

but the charts were created based on a COMPLETELY RANDOM generator.

had to bring that up here [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
Barron

d0nkaments · #18 08-07-2007, 11:52 AM

Today's Downgrades:

Two stocks were downgraded to an unattractive PowerRating (for Investors) today. Stocks with low PowerRatings (for Investors) have tended to underperform the market over the next 12 months. Among today's list of downgrades is:

Jones Soda (NasdaqCM:JSDA - News) was downgraded to 2, from 3. Last week, the company, which develops, produces, markets, licenses and distributes premium beverages and related products, reported earnings.

sebbb · #19 08-07-2007, 01:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]

i just wanna take a second here and say this is why i laugh at supports. MMAP can generate price charts that technical analysis will come back and say " here are support levels based on previous trading" etc.

but the charts were created based on a COMPLETELY RANDOM generator.

had to bring that up here [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
Barron

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm totally new to trading, but I feel that your logic is flawed here.

Take this poker analogy: let's say you create a bot and make it play against aba (without him knowing), and after a few hands you ask him his analysis on a given hand. He then tells you what he thinks the bot's range is on each street.

But HAHA tricked you aba, it was a bot that played hands totally randomly!!

So now can you say that trying to put a villain on a range is flawed?

I think your logic would be correct if we assumed that the market was totally random.

The fact that people tend to see patterns even in randomness doesn't mean that those patterns are wrong when applied to the real market.

Now I'm not defending TA since I'm just starting to learn about it and I'll see on my own if it works, but your argument does not convince me that it doesn't.

DcifrThs · #20 08-07-2007, 05:49 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

i just wanna take a second here and say this is why i laugh at supports. MMAP can generate price charts that technical analysis will come back and say " here are support levels based on previous trading" etc.

but the charts were created based on a COMPLETELY RANDOM generator.

had to bring that up here [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
Barron

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm totally new to trading, but I feel that your logic is flawed here.

Take this poker analogy: let's say you create a bot and make it play against aba (without him knowing), and after a few hands you ask him his analysis on a given hand. He then tells you what he thinks the bot's range is on each street.

But HAHA tricked you aba, it was a bot that played hands totally randomly!!

So now can you say that trying to put a villain on a range is flawed?

I think your logic would be correct if we assumed that the market was totally random.

The fact that people tend to see patterns even in randomness doesn't mean that those patterns are wrong when applied to the real market.

Now I'm not defending TA since I'm just starting to learn about it and I'll see on my own if it works, but your argument does not convince me that it doesn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

i've stated numerous times that TA works and have offered some thoughts as to why that is. it isn't strong enough of a "it works" though for me to be sold on it. from my understanding TA bases "supports" and other trend based indicators on the hypothesis that there is a human psychological or financial hand behind the trend itself.

instead, there can be a random generator that makes supports and long trends and many other TA based indicators
seem real (i.e. as predicable as with real price charts where it is assumed there is some determinant of the behavior that is not random).

so while it may work, it isn't good enough to show me results that say "look, it worked for X amt of time and i made Y profits" even if those #s are extremely impressive (as they are for firms that do this stuff like renaissance etc.). for me personally, i want to dig into the generator.

so with TA, you can't know when it will work and when it won't.

my conveying of facts wasn't meant to convince you that TA definitely doesn't work. it doesn't stand a burden of proof for that, as TA does work. it just simply states that the assumption that there is a hand behind the TA based indicators is flawed and definitely wrong since non-deterministic price changes can show the same TA based indicators.

Barron