Govt Economic releases are worthless

You want proof?

http://www.star-telegram.com/ed_wall...ry/628283.html

Oh, and when you hear Goldman Sachs predicting $150 to $200 oil, remember, they are part of a group of distinguished investment firms that lost $74 billion last year for their customers, while paying their execs $38 billion in bonuses.

And if you want to go back further, you will probably find that they were all part of the creating and pushing the Internet bubble. When are we going to learn?

And That .... my friend, is exactly why I don't listen to news anymore, I trade strictly technicals...... And it is getting to the point I where I am not reading any of the crap at FF anymore too........ Don't get me wrong there is some excellent stuff here ... but there is a ton of manure you gotta wade through to find it.

the news releases are useful for the big boys.........perfect cover-ups for them when they manipulate the prices......killing people like us............

I will not underestimate GS prediction of $200 oil since they also predicted the $100 oil back in 2005

however I'm one of those who believed $119.9 was the max (it was the weekly fibo level, and the gold was corrected on the same fibo level on March) and with the Chinese production rush b4 Olympic I still believe (and pray) this rally won't hold after US summer.

back to news, here are some way to use the news to your benefit

I agree that we shouldn't take news into our trading consideration but we should consider news to get some info about "currencies' tendencies"

these last few weeks were showing good example

good US news - USD up
bad US news - USD up (divergence) and those were when the bigboys fooled newbies and straddlers

but on the last unemployment release, which was quite good, the USD was down and so was the DJIA (support break)

it is quite safe then, at least for me to assume that the USD is going to get weaker next week, anytime I receive trading signals I will put this fact in mind

but of course this is no substitute to whatever technical proven method we have been using

If you truly believe that then don't trade the news.

The oil market is simple, the price will continue to climb as long as there are people willing to buy it at that price. Here in the US we will probably see gas prices pushing the 6 to maybe even 8 dollars a gallon or higher this summer.

There is a point where people will not be able to afford to drive anywhere expect if deemed very necessary and the cost of production will cause massive inflation, When folks stop driving and buying the price will come down.

Prepare your self the oil market is aggressively probing to find it's top and it still has a ways to go.

fwiw,

Agree. Loved your link. Currently a little north of you near the top of the I-35 triangle in another part of the old metroplex, now turned mega-opolis, on it's merry way to becoming a giga-opolis...

To confirm your thread premise, in case you missed it, check this out.
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2008/...s/?mod=WSJBlog

Excerpt: "...A statement from the chair of the NABE’s statistics committee, Haver Analytics President Maurine Haver, asserted that “just when reliable and timely indicators are needed most, resources devoted to their production at our federal statistical agencies have been cut, requiring the termination of data series or a reduction in sample sizes used to produce the data..."

In the early days of the digital age, we had a saying... "GIGO"

my two cents

the forex isn't a real market

when i say that, i mean it isn't controlled by a mass of people like stock markets are

what you see on your charts is nothing more than the decisions a small handful of central bankers are making

the only way to have an edge is to learn how they base their decisions to buy and sell.....

once you read the market like they do (which is impossible in my opinion) then you will be on the "right" side of trades, because you, small fry, are betting the same way they are....

Put though your friendly bucket shops market making magic for extra mystery.

Seems unnecessarily bitter. Goldman Sachs is one of the most accurate names in the business. Remember, they correctly bet and profited from the subprime mess and accurately predicted the $100 per barrel of oil back in 2005, as was pointed out already. They lost money from their customers? What micro division are you referring to? Last quarter's earnings, though down from prior year, was nothing to complain about in these markets. In fact it was rather impressive given the benchmarks across the industry.

In addition: what kind of legitimate source is a journalist with the star telegram? His claim to fame is car reviews. He just happens to do business journalism as well.

The reason I point that out is that he is intentionally misleading. I will use one example. "If inflation was calculated like it was in 1970...". Well, inflation is calculated the same way. We just changed what goes into the calculation. We now have many indicators of inflation that give different types of information. The "core inflation" rate given by the government doesn't include volatile items like food or energy. It's a measurement we have been using since 1975 and the premise is simple. Oil might change in price because of political turmoil (price increases) or international demand slowing down dramatically (aka when the USSR collapsed). Food prices might go up and down because of weather or poor harvests. Therefore, including those items in a measurement that attempts to determine basic economic principles means you aren't measuring fundamental economics that can be controlled by price and interest rate but by forces beyond your control.

There are many indicators that might make more sense. The consumer price index, for example. Interest rates announcements to use another example. I don't think the problem is that the information is misleading. I think the problem is that there is too much information for a single person to take in all at once and analyze. And when you finally do understand it, the price has already taken the news into account because there are thousands and thousands of economists who understand it much quicker than us.

Walrus,
The article stated that 5 investment firms were responsible for the losses, of which one was Goldman Sachs. To predict oil at $100 in 2005 and now $150 - $200 is an invitation for speculators to buy buy buy. Funamentals be damned. They have a vested interest in keeping oil (or any other instrument they tout) high.

As far as Mr. Wallace's qualities as a legitmate source, you would have to be familiar with his artices and weekly radion show to be a believer. Just bcause I happen to be a software guy by profession doesn't mean that I don't now a lot about something else. In today's information world, it is not hard to becomean expert on a subject based upon research. Especially when you have the time to do it. This guy knows awhat he's talking about.

I was not commenting on news and the forex market so much as the fact that you can't trust the govt numbers.

I Could not keep myself from laughing hard to a point I felt pain in my stomach after reading your comment:

... but there is a ton of manure you gotta wade through to find it

jsut like finding that cell phone in Dianosaur manure in Jurasic Park.???

JUST BELIEVE IN YOURSELF rather than EXPERTS... The only help experts can offer you is to lose your money faster than you would do if you were on your own...

GOOD LUCK TRADING

That's where actually reading and understanding the article comes into play. It said "Wall Street banks lost $74billion". It never said what banks lost money. Goldman wasn't one of those banks who lost money.

It then mentioned Goldman Sachs as an example of someone who gave out big bonuses. Well, they did. Because they made tons of money. They successfully betted against the sub prime mortgages at the perfect time and had their best year on record. That's why that bank alone accounted for over half of all bonuses out of the big wall street banks in 2007.

Obviously, one year of big losses isn't going to stop wall street bonuses. As unfortunate as it is, top talent will inevitably flee to the bank who maintains bonuses. Consider it an investment into talent and not a wasteful expenditure. I guess that's how I try to see it.


I guess you have a point, but what's the alternative. No predictions? No sharing of analysis? I think the only thing worse than an overload of information is a lack of information. Embrace what you see and try to make money using it.


I think if you take all the information thrown at you
together as a whole, you can certainly paint a good picture of economic health. No single economic indicator is going to be the smoking gun for a successful strategy. In fact, usually markets already factor in "expectations" and therefore they won't necessarily have the effect they should have unless the numbers are significantly off in one direction or the other.