Sorry!! The article you are trying to read is not available now.
Thank you very much;
you're only a step away from
downloading your reports.

Minyan Mailbag - Complexity Analysis: WFMI

By

Two sides to every story!

PrintPRINT

Note: Our goal in Minyanville is to remove intimidation from the financial markets and encourage an interactive dialogue among the Minyanship. We share this next column with that very intent.

Hi Scott,

I've got a question, well, rather a request, in regards to
your Whole Foods Market (WFMI) analysis that you recently posted on Minyanville. See, I also subscribe to Bernie Schaeffer's Option Newsletter and he is quite bullish on WFMI, in fact, it's a long pick of his in a recent newsletter. I've seen Bernie post a few times on Minyanville and was wondering if Scott and Bernie could give us Minyans some more commentary on their opposing views. I don't have any position in WFMI and now that I have 2 very different opinions from 2 individuals that I highly respect, well, it makes me go hmmmmm, maybe I need to do some more homework on this one before I put any money down.

I don't know if you guys can do this but I thought I'd ask. Thanks!

Regards,
Minyan Tom

Tom,

I trust Bernie's opinion very much but the irony (or perhaps dichotomy) of the markets and my complexity analysis is that two diverging opinions can exist at the same time.

My analysis is all about probability distributions: what are the weighted probabilities of a particular move during a particular time period? It is possible entirely that Bernie's analysis covers a different specific time period than mine. It is also possible that, of course, my probabilities are incorrect; if I believe, say, there is a 75-85% probability of a bearish move, there remains, of course, 15-25% probability that I am wrong. Perhaps even I am wrong in my assessment of those weighted probabilities.

My point is that Bernie's analysis and my own may not be mutually exclusive and even if they are, I suspect he would relay the same message to you as I: probability demands that there is a non-trivial chance one of us is wrong but that doesn't mean our methodology isn't correct.

Thanks for the kind words.

S

< Previous
  • 1
Next >
No positions in stocks mentioned.

The informatio= n on this website solely reflects the analysis of or opinion about the perf= ormance of securities and financial markets by the writers whose articles a= ppear on the site. The views expressed by the writers are not necessarily t= he views of Minyanville Media, Inc. or members of its management. Nothing c= ontained on the website is intended to constitute a recommendation or advic= e addressed to an individual investor or category of investors to purchase,= sell or hold any security, or to take any action with respect to the prosp= ective movement of the securities markets or to solicit the purchase or sal= e of any security. Any investment decisions must be made by the reader eith= er individually or in consultation with his or her investment professional.= Minyanville writers and staff may trade or hold positions in securities th= at are discussed in articles appearing on the website. Writers of articles = are required to disclose whether they have a position in any stock or fund = discussed in an article, but are not permitted to disclose the size or dire= ction of the position. Nothing on this website is intended to solicit busin= ess of any kind for a writer's business or fund. Minyanville management= and staff as well as contributing writers will not respond to emails or ot= her communications requesting investment advice.

Copyright 2011 Minyanville Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved.<= /p>

PrintPRINT
 
Featured Videos

WHAT'S POPULAR IN THE VILLE