...
altcoinUK
That's actually another point in Armstrong's favor, that he is giving it to us straight (well, if you have a subscription, even straighter) without having to shill "CNBS-style". As well as letting us know from time-to-time that he just doesn't know.
* * *
Disclosure: I have no problem with anyone posting here and saying whatever they want. I would not mind if someone wants to do some REAL WORK (= a lot) to take, say, the last 6 months of MA's predictions, post the results, and run a statistical analysis on them. Granted, a lot of work for an uncertain value.
As for the disclosure, no one is more supportive of the unmoderated thread concept than me, but there is a difference of having an open dialogue about ideas or read over and over the condescending trolling of that sloanf boy who point out what an idiot TPTB_need_war is which itself a very ridiculous things to say. You can say a few things about TPTB_need_war if you really feel the world must know what is your fucking opinion about him, but you can't say with a straight face that he is an idiot - only a troll say that.
As for Armstrong, yes I agree, one of the big plus about him that he is the exact opposite of the usual CNBC shills. The CNBC and Bloomberg is on for me all the time, but the level of shilling is sometimes is beyond endurance on those channels. I pay for the analysis of many analysts like McClellan, Avi Gilburt, etc. and I can get useful insights from them or from their community (in the case of the latest), but Armstrong the only one who tell you honestly that sorry, it is too volatile and I don't have a clear pointer. As I said several times I am not a big fan of Armstrong's sales approach, but on the other hand nobody is fucking perfect, so we should give the man a bloody break and stop demanding from him to be a 100% perfect forecaster, trader, historian, economists, sociologist, analyst and gentleman.
That's a great comment, altcoinUK.
In almost all public forums, it pays to write in a non-trolly (that was clumsily expressed, sorry) fashion. But, since MA's work is unclear to me about how predictive it is, well, that's another reason I started this thread. So, even if
sloanf has differing opinions (and a poor way of enlisting possible allies to carefully look at Armstrong more critically), hey, it's OK. I'm here to learn, bitchez.
I too (but in the past) have paid for subscriptions to newsletters, etc. re the financial markets. My experience was that the ideas were of interest, but the recommendations often were not profitable. So, I now look for
IDEAS more than hard predictions.
I do leave open the real possibility that MA has a good record (we will just have see, at least I will), I hope that he is onto something with all of his data and the supercomputer grinding away...
Hear you re CNBS and Bloomberg shilling, they are probably all for Shillary! anyway.........