On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 00:58:27 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:


"Jack Goff" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:42:20 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"NOYB" wrote in message
hlink.net...
But none of this has anything to do with that awful subject...politics.

Right?


If you watch CNBC, you'll learn that oil prices are directly
proportional
to the number of Israeli soldiers taken hostage by radical Islamists.

Today's headline:
"Oil Prices fall on rumors Israeli soldiers have been released" (CNBC)



It's not always that simple. On the PBS news show I mentioned earlier, the
futures trader had a graph of price changes going back a month or two, and
labels indicating news events that either caused price changes, or didn't.
In some cases, there were events that really should've caused spikes, but
nothing happened. And, events which had no imaginable impact on oil
produced
jumps. This is the investor stupidity I pointed out a few days back, which
Bertie got so inflamed about.


Hmm... maybe the events the "futures trader" chose to put on his graph
had little, or nothing, to do with the changes in the oil prices.

He put them there because they resembled events which had, in the past,
caused blips.

But you also wrote:

When that Chechnyan terrorist died a few weeks back, the price blipped down
a buck, according to the traders in the interview. That's fantasy at work.

So these PBS experts showed how prices may have moved up and down in
reaction to some events, but don't react at all to other similar
events that should, by their reckoning, cause a flunctuation. It
seems they really aren't sure what causes the flunctuations, or at
least can't point to the real cause with any regularity.

It sounds to me like they can't see the forest for the trees. Think
about it, and get back to me on what that might mean.


Are you familiar with the way some individual investors dump half their
mutual funds because just one corporation fires its CEO?


That *may* have happened at some point. How many "individual
investors" share their private portfolio transactions with you, and
their personal reasons for carrying out those transactions? Or is
this something else a PBS expert told you?