Sorry Res, a final reply.I have observed that posters are still making sure that they do not learn how to do things rightAcme, you know he is refering to you and I. Well, JWR: I did take a little personal offense to this last little statement. You see, as part of my professional life I examined banks and specifically enjoyed the part of examining thier models - You know the ones they use for managing interest rate risk, aggregating and reporting VaR, asset/liability management. Wow, the things you can learn when you dive into modeling 8 billion dollar securities portfolio, or trying to value the mortgage servicing rights on a 60 billion dollar mortgage platform. Liked it so much I got a job at a top tier bank! So, I am pretty sure I know how to do things right (though as I admit I may lack the ability)My friend Acme - well I beleive he has pointed out a PhD-CE and while him an I have never talked about the phase transformation of zirconium from hexagonal closed pack to body center cubic, or using hydrazine as an oxygen scavenger in feedwater systems, I think he has got a clue on how to "do things right" And I value his efforts to pass along that knowledge and experience to the next generation.Point - questioning our efforts I think is really bad formWas I critical of your "strategy" yep! But, I simply tried to point out areas where you could improve your presentation. Kinda like when I had to do that thesis thing... Feedback made my thesis on - oh by the way -a strategy for portfolio construction, stronger, more coherent and easily understandable. Plus it made me stronger.Was Acme critical - and tried to help, at first. But what the heck do you expect. You see, we both provided feedback that would have made you and your strategy stronger. If it is arrogance that halts your progress, well, sorry. If it is your arrogance that puts cat food an old lady's shopping cart. Sleep well!From an examination stand point - Key points you have missed in your models:Model control practices are inadequate - documentation of model performance does not include a review of the models thoery and lacks any rigor in the models limitations and potential weaknesses. data needs definition and operating procedures are also inadequate and can easily cause inappropriate application. Model Validation and Verification are inadequate - both the developmental evidence and process verification place serious question on the integrity of the model and its outputs. while the reasonablness of the output appears possible, actual back testing or other validation methods have not been employed. This lack of outcome analysis and review of the prediction methodology and accuracy render the model inappropriate for use.One of the final areas that would be reviewed in such a case would be the experience and expertise of the staff - IOW, you. I won't rate that here. Though it is apparant others have. My beef is not with you, it is with your lack of support for your model. Point - if you can't explain your model it is either because you don't understand it or because it is crap!If you want to back (TF) up and say, I have an "idea", perhaps a dividend/income strategy might work if,,,, great. But when you start indicating you have a SWR, something a consumer can bank thier retirement on you owe it to them to do a better job than it appears you are doing! While you may not see any fiduciary type of responsibility as the internet anonymity shields the true JWR, I jsut ask you stop and think about helping - not harming.d(</rant>)/dT Wow, imagine that.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Ra