beyond charting, page-37

Geez Muppett, will you stop it!

Because one doesn't want something to be so doesn't imply that the thing can't be, or isn't in fact so.

I agree that the company looks great fundamentally but there is absolutely no point in deriding chartists, particularly when there are a number of very high quality, profitable chartists on Hot Copper who prove that it is valid (for whatever reason). In fact, some of the best chartists on HC specialise in smallcap stocks.

I've also shown on numerous occasions that smallcap stocks tend to retrace to the 61.8% fibonacci retracement off the previous leg up, whereas larger stocks often exhibit a 38.2 or 50% retracement.

It's nothing more than the mathematics of price and group psychology.

Some (fundamental) analysts choose to use discounted cash flow as their standard valuation method; others use sum of parts. You'll find that ALL methods of analysis involve some estimation of what "should" be.

e.g. when calculating DCF, what is a fair discount rate and is it accurate simply to compare to peers when no two companies are the same? Sum of parts calcs also have a host of issues.

Bit of respect works wonders :)