| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 445.1 | Lets see the goods! | SAHQ::ROSENKRANZ | Rock with Gene & Eddy | Thu Apr 08 1993 19:38 | 3 |
| I am usually quite skeptical of this kind of marketing of newsletters.
If they don't send me a sample newsletter so I get an idea of what
it is I'm buying, in the trash it goes.
|
| 445.2 | not a bad goal, but... | NOVA::FINNERTY | Sell high, buy low | Thu Apr 08 1993 20:51 | 14 |
|
In principle, if you could select positive-alpha stocks with low beta,
you could make consistent nominal profits. There's just two problems:
1) Alphas are small and generally not statistically significant.
2) Alphas change over time
Every money manager is ultimately judged on their ability to find
positive alpha holdings with minimum risk/return... the trick is how
to forecast this.
Find out how he does his forecasting, then let us know.
|
| 445.3 | | AOSG::GILLETT | Candidate for DCU Board of Directors | Mon Apr 12 1993 20:41 | 6 |
| FWIW....
Gillett's 5th Law of Investing: Anybody who says they have
a proven system doesn't.
./chris
|
| 445.4 | Oops, missing: ) | VMSDEV::HALLYB | Fish have no concept of fire | Tue Apr 13 1993 12:35 | 14 |
| Lee Euler is a huckst\s\k\c\u\h marketer/promoter. He'll sell you
anything you're interested in. If you are bullishly inclined toward
the future prospects of pantyhose in Pamplona, Lee will have at least
two newsletters that he's affiliated with that will help you net in a
pile of profits.
There's nothing fraudulent here. The guy is a salesman, not an investor.
(I'm looking at an ad from him that pitches a computerized AI OEX option
predictor for $595. Backtests beautifully, makes a million over a few
years. But he's apparently more interested in selling it than trading it.
Draw your own conclusions.
John
|
| 445.5 | Where have I heard that name before? | MCIS2::BONVALLAT | | Wed Apr 14 1993 22:35 | 48 |
| While I agree with those who are skeptical about this type of advertising
and I would almost never respond to these glossy junkmail ads either, I must
tell you that I will be subscribing to "Scientific Investment".
I'll try to keep a long story as short as I can....
I know Bill Chidester pretty well. When I was right out of college (1980)
I subscribed to Bill Chidester's first 3 investment newsletters which he
published under the Orion Publishing name (which was his own small company).
I was one of his first subscribers. I was very impressed by the clarity and
intelligence of his arguments - in comparison to many other investment
letters I had reviewed. His stock selections were above average (although
not dramatically so) but what really caught my eye were his forecasts on
the general market and the economy which is where I felt he excelled.
He is an excellent writer (and a former Editor of Value Line), and when you
combine that with his tremendous understanding of how free markets operate
you end up with some very educational reading.
By 1986, he had about 2,000 subscribers to his Orion newsletters when he
decided to shut it down to focus on forming a start-up company with another
publisher. I actually met him for lunch in Manhattan during this time
and ended up giving him a VERY VERY small amount of the $1.5 million he
raised for his new venture....called Infocomm. Much of that money went
to purchase a VAX and customized software from DEC which allowed Infocomm
to produce the first customized investment letter. The letter was customized
to cover any 20 stocks which a subscriber had listed as the stocks he/she
was interested in. The letter was published bi-weekly with up-to-date charts
and newsfeeds on the selected stocks as well as other investment opinions
on those companies. It was quite a feat to produce an investment letter
which was very different for each subscriber. Unfortunately, the company
never made it. Infocomm's first issue was published the week of the Crash
of 1987 (when the investment publishing industry went into an immediate
Depression) and they ran out of cash.
I believe that the results which the Hulbert Financial Digest has been
monitoring "since 1985" was actually Infocomm's Model Portfolios during the
late 1980s and only recently applies to "Scientific Investment" which I
believe is only about a year old. So much for truth in advertising, huh?
I will say that Infocomm's letter contained a Relative Strength Portfolio
which had just amazing performance during the time which Infocomm published.
Obviously stocks with high relative strength are likely to have a very
positive Alpha, and I believe this is basically the investment concept which
has been carried over to Scientific Investment. Also, when I last talked
to Bill Chidester on the telephone (about 2 years ago), he mentioned to me
that he had been working closely on projects with Louis Navalier in California
who has an excellent performance history with his MPT newsletter.
Scientific Investment is obviously an extension of that work.
Hope this gives you a good background on Bill Chidester. - Jeff
|