txtittyfan's second call to short treasuries

31 comments

• Dougster

  •

  13 years ago

  I also get the feeling the dollar is due for a bounce here, although I acknowledge one would want to get in cautiously and not stay too long: 5/6/2011: DXY 74.3
• looneylarry

  •

  13 years ago

  [Yawn]
• samsung1

  •

  13 years ago

  Dougster give us some of your investing advice. What are you investing in? You seem pretty intelligent and experienced.
• farmerart

  •

  13 years ago

  I know nothing about the bond market - just that it scares me. I have traded forex contracts in the past but not the index you quote. My feeling is that you are late in jumping on the USD. It has already had a HUGE move up against the euro and in recent days has moved up 2%-3% against CAD and Aussie. I missed the highs in CAD, Aussie, and Kiwi by miles when I closed my positions during the winter. I can see no discernible trend in USD at the moment just volatility piled on volatility. Long term, the debt/deficit nightmare can only have disastrous consequences for USD but that may not work out until I am long dead. For a trader volatility is pure sweetness. Good luck with your ballsy call but I would watch it very carefully. I have different irons in the fire now (wildcat wells in south eastern Alberta).
• txtittyfan

  •

  13 years ago

  Dougster always conveniently forgets that the last time he said buy the dollar, it was at 80.24.
• steve229

  •

  13 years ago

  "give us some of your investing advice." Oh, yes, please, I get all my investing advice from here and Strippper Web.
• dudeanonymous

  •

  13 years ago

  I invest all my money in long term LD contracts.
• Dougster

  •

  13 years ago

  txittyfan: Oh, I didn't forget. I also said I added at around 78, and then I said get out in the upper 80's right near the end of the Euro debt crisis in 2009. Did *you* forget that part? samsung: Like I said I think getting into the US dollar now is reasonable. As farmerart points out though, there is reason for caution, so I would only scale up (i.e. start with a small position (maybe 1/5th) and only add if it rises.) There's definitely a chance I'm wrong here, in which case txtittyfan will get the last laugh. We'll just have to see what happens. samsung: You've made some pretty good calls in the past. What do you like here?
• gatorfan

  •

  13 years ago

  Taking financial advice on a strip club website
• vincemichaels

  •

  13 years ago

  Yawn
• Dougster

  •

  13 years ago

  Btw, when I talk about a "full position" I mean 10:1 leverage. So I think a good start would be 2:1 leverage, and build on that if long dollars turns out to be profitable here (and Friday was a good start).
• rickdugan

  •

  13 years ago

  Really Dougster? ;) A lot of seasoned currency traders with advanced, proprietary algorithms at their disposal have had their asses handed to them on levered currency trades. All it takes is one bad day for daily mark to market margin calls to wipe out a core capital position. And by the way, large, well established hedge fund managers cannot easily find a counterparties willing to give them credit facilities sufficient to lever to a 10:1 ration, so who is going to do that for a knucklehead like you? Now would be a good time to stop talking out of your asshole.
• Dougster

  •

  13 years ago

  Oh geee, not too many retail brokers would be willing to give clients 10:1 leverage, huh, Rick? Are you sure? Really, Rick? The standard is to let any retail client go up to 50:1. Look up it up, moron! Holy fuck are you stupid.
• Dougster

  •

  13 years ago

  Rick: Here's a little help to get you start, since you could very well be too dumb to use a search engine: [view link] "Trade with less: With leverage up to 50:1" Now please admit you know nothing about this topic and go the fuck away.
• rickdugan

  •

  13 years ago

  You know what Dougster? I'm going to make an admission here: you're right. No doubt you don't hear that too often, but there it is. In my irritation over the whole concept behind this stupid thread I made a knee jerk comment. There is a reason that I don't know too much about the mechanics of trading currencies, however, and that is because nobody I deal with is stupid enough to try to make a living doing it. The folks that I deal with generally limit their currency trades to locking in future exchange prices. An the reason for this is simple: nobody can predict day-to-day currency market fluctuations.
• rickdugan

  •

  13 years ago

  ...Or I should say nobody I normally deal with. As I mentioned above, I have indeed seen many people get their asses handed to them in the currency markets. More often than not this involved guys who thought that they had a fool proof trading system. :) But good luck with all of that. No doubt with your advanced degree in Economics you have developed a way to keep your finger on the pulse of macroeconomic trends and have a sure fire way to predict day to day exchange rate fluctuations. :)
• txtittyfan

  •

  13 years ago

  Rick, You are correct that Dougster is full of shit. He likes to re-write history to suit him. His call to buy the dollar at 80.24 took 1 year to be profitable. It did not reach the high 80's untl May-June 2010, not late 2009. If he actually made the trades, he would have known that. Dougster is the type of individual that knows buzzwords, but not concepts. Regarding my call to short treasuries, it is a low risk position if you want to reduce portfolio volatility. This is almost as low risk for a bond trade as buying zero coupon bonds was in the 80's. Rates are going to go up, when they do, you can start kissing your stock returns good bye. I think Dougster just envies the rest of us who actually visit SC's and have a good time. He visits clubs in and around Everett, WA., per Wikipidia, Everett has high crime and low per capita income. These attributes usually are found in areas of poor education. But at least it is a good area for him to park his short bus.
• txtittyfan

  •

  13 years ago

  To add further, Dougster uses the ETF to track my short bond call. Anyone that understands the structure and pricing of bond ETF's would know that they are like apples and oranges, and would not be used to hedge a portfolio as bonds would be. Again, he knows the buzzword, not the concept. But then Dougster can't be the board bitch unless he posts with vitriolic stupidity.
• MrsGMD

  •

  13 years ago

  Why don't you all just pull your dicks out and see which one is really biggest. All this comparison by proxy is amusing, but not very productive.
• troop

  •

  13 years ago

  MrsGMD 05/09/11 5:26 PM Why don't you all just pull your dicks out and see which one is really biggest. All this comparison by proxy is amusing, but not very productive. ^^^ LOL
• Dougster

  •

  13 years ago

  Rick: Think you are confusing me with txtittyfan, who has claimed to be a day trader. For me holding an investment a year or more is no big deal. The bottom line here is you were talking out of your ass (as you often do here). Thanks for admitting it. I'll always have your admission to point to now. IDIOT RICK LOSES AGAIN!
• Dougster

  •

  13 years ago

  txtittyfan: You might not be aware of this, but there is no rule saying you cannot hold investments for a year or more. Not sure what your point is. I am using the ETF IEF to track your performance, because you have admitted to using ETFs (like TBT which is 2x short treasuries) in the past although here you are trying to present the image that you are too sophisticated for something as lowly as an ETF. Finally you have visited strip clubs in Phoenix which has almost exactly the same per capita income as Everett and even more crime. Similarly for Van Nuys. If we apply your own logic, this therefore proves you have little education (not surprising), correct?
• Dougster

  •

  13 years ago

  tittyfan: For your reference here's the thread where I said to get out near the top on DXY. On 6/14/2010 to be exact. [view link] 88.71 was the peak, and I said out at 86.97 very shortly after. Now, if you can so me where, if ever, you said to get out on your call to short treasuries the day before they bottomed in 2009.
• txtittyfan

  •

  13 years ago

  Dougster, we have been through this before, my short treasury that day was a ETF profitable trade for the day. My profit came in a day, yours took a year. You bought at the top, and continued buying into the downtrend. And to put an end to this, my comment to short treasury was in comparison to the dollar, I said the money would be made shorting treasuries, not long the dollar. I was right, as my profit was in a day as aresult of a failed auction, and you had to wait out a 1 year decline to get you profit. While you were waiting a year to get your money back, I continued making daily/weekly profits. Or to restate, you said buy the dollar, when it was at its top.
• Dougster

  •

  13 years ago

  tittfan: "Or to restate, you said buy the dollar, when it was at its top." Huh? I said buy at 80 and then later at 78, and then I said sell at 87, but even though it went much higher than both these points. How is buying at 80 and 78 and then selling at 87 "buying at the top"? You aren't making any sense at all... Also it's fund that you now you admit that you did trade treasuries through an ETF but above you say you are too sophisticated for that? In another thread you say you don't trade treasuries at all, only stocks? Can't keep your story straight for long, huh? Your original advice to short treasuries the day before they bottomed was a long term call. A month later you were still saying they were in a long term downtrend. About two years later they are still way above where you said short (there were only a few hours in those years when they were lower than the point where you said to short), and now your advice? Just hang in there and short some more...
• txtittyfan

  •

  13 years ago

  It seems that there are other savvy traders/investors that share my view. [view link] A few weeks ago, even PIMCO announced they had divested themselves of treasury holdings. And yes Dougster, you did buy at 80 and again at 78, and the dollar coninued to go down for a year afterwards. You had to wait a year to breakeven. Only losers buy downtrends. If you would have truly bought at 10:1 leverage as you claim, you would have had significant losses for a year. My guess is you never made the trade because you lack the trading and financial acumen.
• vincemichaels

  •

  13 years ago

  YAWN
• Dougster

  •

  13 years ago

  tittyfan: It is really sad to see how desperate you are and that the only thing you can do is resort to blatant lies. And no matter how many times I call you down, you just keep going, and going, and getting siller and siller. Classic sign of a compulsive liar. Your last and greatest lie is true a dandy, trying to convince people that someone who says buy at 80 and 78, and then sell at 87 has "bought the top" and lost money. Good luck with that argument. You can't really think anyone (including yourself) is going to buy it can you? Here's a little help, tittyfan: top means highest price, but 87 is greater than both 78 and 80, so it cannot be the top. Here's another tip if you sell something at more than you paid for it, you made money not lost. Guess they didn't teach you that in special ed though, right? Now let's consider your other lies. You did, indeed, say to short treasuries the day before they bottomed almost two years ago. At one point when the database here was down here, you thought I won't be able to provide evidence so you denied ever making that claim. Ooops, the database came back up and you were busted! Your next attempt to weasel out: claim you only meant it as a day trade all along, because you knew there would be one more bad auction and that would be it. Problem is everything you were saying then, a week later, a month later, months later, and even now indicated you viewed it as a long term trade. You said China would stop buying and the long term trend was down. Two years later there is absolutely no evidence of either. Your reaction? Hang in there and short some more, and cite some "pundits" on CNBC as your back up. Yep if you are taking your trading advice from CNBC I can see part of your problem. Can't think for yourself. (Also there were no "failed auctions" in 2009. Do you even know what that means? It means not enough buyers for all the supply. I really don't understand why you lie so much when it is againt facts that can be so readily verified. Really think no one will check what you said?) Also as you can clearly see above I never advocate going in 10:1 all at once, and never had that leverage on the trade in question (of course, in retrospect I wish I did). Never went above 4:1 on that trade. An initial 2x buy, and then an addition at 2x. Never went above 4:1. Your numbers are just plain lies to. There was only a four month clear downtrend out the year, and then it bounced back rapidly. [view link] It was when the bounce back was very clear that I added. Your reaction then was puzzling, you admitted that the dollar was now going up but called me an idiot for buy some at 78. You were proven quite wrong went it went all the way to 88, and then I got out at 87 very close to the top. Bottom line here: You said to short treasuries the day before they bottomed as a long term trade. You've tried to lie and deny this in the past, but you got busted, and switched your story to claiming you only meant it as a day trade, when everything you said at the time, a week later, a month later, months later, and even now suggests you were advocating a long term trade. So far it's been highly unprofitable, and there is no evidence it is turning. Why not post the numbers about how well someone would have done if your advice was so great? Oh I know why you don't do it. Because they would have lost money. On the other hand, I have evidence all there in black and white, of a highly profit long the dollar trade and getting out right near the optimal point. You are jealous that you have zero evidence of your alleged trading acumen to show to the world. All you can do is say "yes, but rates are going way up soon, I know it!" You have been saying that for two years and nothing has happened except the short position you advocated has remained highly unprofitable. Worst yet you can even admit you are wrong and say get out of the trade. But, hey, I am always willing to pit my skills against yours for all the world to see. That's what this thread is all about. See the relative performance of your second call to short treasuries versus an alternative I am proposing. Don't be scared tittyfan, let's just let history see who is right. K? luv ya, Dougster.
• Dougster

  •

  13 years ago

  Ok, I actually clicked on tittyfan's link. At first I thought it would be Jim Cramer, but it turns out it was Jim Rogers. Interesting choice of people to cite since as recently as a few weeks ago Jim Rogers said he thought thought the dollar was either going to explode here for 10 to 20%, or if it fell 3-4% more totally collapse after that. He thought the former was more likely though and got out of his owne short dollars position.
• Dougster

  •

  13 years ago

  Thought I would check in on how tittyfan's advice is doing. Today IEF closed at $106.41. Since tittyfan said to short treasuries when IEF was around $93.5 that means anyone who followed his advice would be down about $12.91 for every $93.5 invested just on face value, but with 6 dividends of $0.24 each add another $1.44 for being down $13.35 for each $93.5 invested or down 14.3% in just six months! Now contrast tittyfan's advice with my advice, which was to go long the dollar at 4:1 leverage averaged in around 75.2. That advice would currently be up 15.8%.
• Dougster

  •

  13 years ago

  ^^^ Minor correction. txtittyfan's advice would actually be down about $14.35 (not $13.35) for every $93.4 invested or 15.3% in just six months.