Avanti Communications Share Discussion Threads

[restassured] 20/8/2012 12:27

ROFLMAO


Last week it was down,this week it is up.


Head or tails?

[johncsimpson] 20/8/2012 12:26

OK - AVN has, this past hour, breached that top 'resistance' line in the pennant triangulation (see 256).

Also today, the short term MAs I'm using on this graph are now all in their correct (traffic light) sequence (though not perfect), and my day indicators are all neutral as I type, though I wouldn't describe them as steady yet.

If AVN holds above the aforementioned resistance line and doesn't bounce back towards the lower line (which is still possible within the pennant formation), then the next target is a rise towards the 455 area.

AIMHO, of course AND using only a 'proven' handful of the '5,000 popular trading rules' which are apparently available to us chartists.

[k0108356] 20/8/2012 11:41

Back in AVN this am with a few purchases around the 380 level, this breaks the downtrend which had been taking shape since 16/07/2012, the fast money has gone onto the next "hot" stock and now fully expect AVN to continue it's gradual incline. I'd always rather buy at a higher price with confirmation that a new uptrend is in place than gamble at a lower price. Good luck and a gr8 week all :)

[garymott] 20/8/2012 10:56

greengiant, I've not seen you for a long time, are you still with us here?

[jpfd] 19/8/2012 18:54

Ok but what else ya gonna do on a Sunday?

[geheimnis2] 19/8/2012 16:16

Agreed. Each to their own. Let's move on.

[jonnyno1] 19/8/2012 16:11

have we not had enough of this by now...lets move on , each to their own!

[jpfd] 19/8/2012 10:39

Very childish. Why throw money away needlessly? You may live your life on ADVFN but I don't. Most posts here are by fundamentalists and generally confuse real prospects with wishful thinking. How many times do I need to read a variation of "this share is going to the moon", or "100p by Christmas"? You only have to look at the junior PM miners trading on peanut valuations to see where relying on projected fundamentals gets you. When company XYZ starts selling 100,000 ozs gold it will generate so much profit the share price will be 10 times its current price. Yeah right. If anyone buys the shares. And that's the point about TA which seems to be lost on people like you - it shows whether anyone's actually buying the shares. And share buying is what counts.

People easily lose their way in TA. They think TA is one subject involving mathematically derived indicators, and it isn't. They have been persuaded to the idea by those selling software, or guru websites selling advertising, that if the RSI does this and the MACD does that, and so on, then it means the share price will be a buy or a sell. The assumption is that indicators lead the share price. So they test the indicators on that basis and they don't work because the share price leads the indicators and not the other way round. When that realisation sinks in the conclusion is that TA is useless and the book is closed on it. But if you start with first understanding what a chart really is, what a chart actually represents, and take it from there with no preconceived notions and no willingness to accept mathematical mysticism as a valid approach, then a whole different world of TA opens up to you. Not a world which has the lure of obscure mathematics to bamboozle subscribers on websites or sell books, but it's the approach which works.

If you watch CNBC or Bloomburg you will see an endless procession of TA exponents from a large and diverse set of companies. Not that I necessarily agree with their methods, but how come they get to hold down well paid jobs - sometimes as heads of departments - if their analysis is no better than random chance. I certainly wouldn't employ them on that basis but there they are. Apparently their TA input is worth their employment. Presumably then it's not just me that can generate profits from TA.

As for the Macquarie research you quoted here's the piece you chose to leave out from their research statement: "While we cannot rule out the possibility that these trading rules compliment other market timing techniques or that trading rules we do not test are profitable....".

[restassured] 19/8/2012 08:40

No different from the ones who have made seven figure returns for twenty years without one chart in sight.

50/50 means what it says on the tin.


Ps you are clearly so successful that you can't afford the monthly Advfn dues. Lol


Waiting for the inevitable excuse .Lol


@Colva

Source

A new global study has confirmed what many market participants may already feel - that technical analysis doesn't work.

"...we do show that over 5,000 trading rules do not add value beyond what may be expected by chance when used in isolation."

Conducted by New Zealand's Massey University in cooperation with Australia's Macquarie Capital and Macquarie Bank.





Looking forward to your independent research.

[jpfd] 18/8/2012 23:21

Always amusing to read that the methods I've been using for nearly twenty years, to make a seven figure return, are without substance. Particularly ironic as TA criteria flagged Avanti for me in the first place as it came off its lows.

[jonnyno1] 18/8/2012 19:56

rest you are like a dog with a frisbee, please have the final word on TA and then let jcsimpsson post what he likes safe in the knowledge that we know your views...that way we can all move on.

cheers
J.

[colva] 18/8/2012 19:44

Hi rest,
How can you claim that science has disproved TA when the sources that you quote are simply giving their opinion and none claim any scientific credentials.

Jonnyno1 sums it up very well in post 10236 .

[restassured] 18/8/2012 18:48

Of course it is each to his own.However it is rather fascinating science has disproved technical analysis,concluding it is no better than chance.
Especially given the fact there is a massive industry selling systems and books based on a flawed system with no scientific merit.

Head or tails anyone?

[rathlindri] 18/8/2012 12:20

From Moneyweek:

Avanti (LSE: AVN) is a satellite communications company
based in Shoreditch, east London. Demand for satellite data is
rocketing due to increased usage of satellite TV, high-definition
broadcasting, satellite radio, broadband internet, mobile
telephony, global positioning systems and space exploration. All
of this is part of a single, massive trend – people are consuming a
lot more data, exponentially more. And satellites are the cheapest
way there is to beam data quickly around the world.
Avanti recently launched its second satellite, the Hylas 2 (on an
Orbital Sciences rocket, I might add). Hylas 2 greatly expands the
company's capacity and allows it to press aggressively into the
North African and Middle Eastern markets. Avanti is not pausing
for breath – already plans for Hylas 3, scheduled to launch in 2015,
are well underway. The company has experienced management,
robust demand for its services and should benefit from lower
costs as competition in the private rocket sector cuts prices, says
Tom Bulford in the Red Hot Penny Shares newsletter. He has
a target price of 1,500p for the stock, which currently trades at around 375p.

[jonnyno1] 17/8/2012 21:42

Heard all this before, each to their own. Use whatever tools you like, there is no right way, there are lots of wrong ways, dont rely on others and always always dyor.

[sg31] 17/8/2012 19:21

Similar views from Ben Graham. Random Walk Down Wall Street wasn't very complimentay about tech either.

[restassured] 17/8/2012 18:07

"......We find no evidence that the profits to the technical trading rules we consider are
greater than those that might be expected due to random data variation, once we take account
of data snooping bias."




"....... we
can say that over 5,000 popular technical trading rules do not appear to add value, beyond that
which may be explained by chance........"




Ben R. Marshall
Massey University - Department of Economics and Finance

Rochester H. Cahan
Macquarie Capital (USA)

Jared Cahan
Macquarie Bank Ltd

August 1, 2010

[restassured] 17/8/2012 17:54

You've been outed and can't hack it...Clearly you can't read.I will try again.

Your source is a fund manager and blogger.Where is the science? None





"......We find no evidence that the profits to the technical trading rules we consider are
greater than those that might be expected due to random data variation, once we take account
of data snooping bias."




"....... we
can say that over 5,000 popular technical trading rules do not appear to add value, beyond that
which may be explained by chance........"




Ben R. Marshall
Massey University - Department of Economics and Finance

Rochester H. Cahan
Macquarie Capital (USA)

Jared Cahan
Macquarie Bank Ltd

August 1, 2010



Anyway had a rather good day today.Not a chart in sight.See you monday morning.


No more time for your triviata.Some of us have lives to lead.No need to recruit cult members.

[johncsimpson] 17/8/2012 17:37

Technical Analysis – some thoughts

Restassured post 251

You do spout some twaddle don't you?

When you asked me for proof of the validity of Technical Analysis and I pointed out the many thousands of financial institutions who use it, please explain how you choose to ignore this fact letting it wash over your head and countered it with your rather flaky Ben R Marshall piece, post 251.

I suspect you got that (the Ben R Marshall edits) from SSRN which is a research network that publishes papers and research from throughout the world – tens of thousands of them, in fact. Anyone can publish anything. You just have to subscribe and so most of these papers are NOT 'evidence' in any way, shape or form. They're just opinions disseminated for information / discussion.

That apart, you have managed to find one such paper that suits your case and have part lifted several lines from the header. But if you search further in the same Directory, you will find many papers with contrarian views and also one co-authored by the said Ben R. Marshall , (Massey University - Department of Economics and Finance) entitled 'Return Predictabilty Revisited', from which I take the following quote: 'Monthly stock market returns are predictable when we refine the observation intervals of the variables used to predict these returns'.

So even Mr Marshall is somewhat ambivalent when it comes to where he pitches his tent on the matter.

Moving on, I copied and précied this from a paper by one Barry Ritholtz.

Who he? I hear you say?

I don't think it really matters too much who he is. He's just one more person with an opinion but it's very straight forward and doesn't require any special insight other than common sense to be able to understand it. I think once you manage to shake off your pre-conceived notion that I'm trying to gift you good folk some 'truth that I own' (as you put it), that you might otherwise have missed, you'll better be able to see where I'm actually coming from and not where your prejudices keep trying to make me come from.

So; he (Barry Ritholtz) writes:

. . . . . Let's begin with a definition of what technical analysis is NOT.

Technical Analysis is not magic. It is not a way to forecast the future, nor is it a guarantee of future profits. Technical Analysis is not based on someone's estimate of what future earnings might be, nor do they require you to guesstimate management's skill set or presume the desirability of a new product. Pure Technicians don't listen to conference calls or even talk to management.
Technical Analysis can, however, be far less squishy than fundamentals. Technicians use the data that is generated by the markets itself: Price and volume to start with, then many other data points and derivatives thereto.
From this basic data, there are many variations of Technical Analysis:
• Trend followers believe markets exhibit persistence, mostly due to big institutional purchasers. This leads to buying uptrends and selling or shorting downtrends
• Contrarians use Sentiment data to determine when a market has moved too far in one direction or another. The goal is to anticipate a major reversal.
• Pattern recognition traders look for various pictures - pennants, flags, cup & handles, head & shoulders, etc.
Beyond this, there are lots of other types of Technical Analysis.

The issue as to whether Technical Analysis "works" or not is actually framing the wrong question. There is as much art as science in the application of T.A. That some people are lousy technicians proves only that it requires skill. A better discussion to ask is "What information do charts and related data provide, and how can this be used by investors and traders?"
I suggest that charts and data provide tremendous insight, if used appropriately:
They provide a statistical approach to investing, one that describes the probabilities of various outcomes (versus making predictions);
Charts show you if we are in a bull or bear market, allowing you to manage risk appropriately;
Trends can keep you away from the wrong sectors (Housing, Autos, and Finance are obvious examples) or keep you in the right sectors (Energy for instance).
Thereby:
Developing good risk/reward analyses;
Tracking what the institutions are doing;
Identifying specific stocks that might be appealing;
The bottom line is that TA is merely a tool, albeit one used more skilfully by some than others.

Finally, consider this question: If you could look at one and only one source before buying your next stock or fund, which would you choose: a fundamental analyst's report (with no charts in it), or a chart based report of your choosing? While I like having access to both, I cannot ever imagine buying something without first looking at the chart . . .

With all due deference and apologies to Barry Ritholtz for the minor 'editing'.

And for the third time restassured, one final chance for you to substantiate your post 242 as requested in my post 245 and 250 or are you going to ignore this yet again. And can I suggest you deal with this first before you 'go off on another one' and conveniently turn a blind eye and forget? Because here too is evidence that T.A. works. Unless, that is, you DO show that something I've 'predicted' or suggested here is way off the mark.

[johncsimpson] 17/8/2012 17:30

AVN at close today. Pennant still clearly apparent - see post 254 above and has been there since early August.

All 3 day indicators were negative at the end of the day although the one I go to last was neutral for a good part of the early afternoon.

[johncsimpson] 17/8/2012 17:04

k0108356

Cheers and congratulations on your newly arrived. I gave you an honourable mention post 237 this morning . . .

[k0108356] 17/8/2012 16:28

John

I post much of my TA "ramblings" via Twitter @KullyBargota if you fancy following (of course any other BB member's welcome 2) :)

Regards

[johncsimpson] 17/8/2012 15:13

Write-up on Technical Analysis for restassured (and anyone else really) here, later this evening at about 17:45 GMT.

[johncsimpson] 17/8/2012 15:11

Write-up on Technical Analysis for restassured (and anyone else really) later this evening, about 17:45 GMT in that 'Other Place' i.e. the other thread.