<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
	xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">

	<channel>
    	<title>TickerHound.com</title>

		<link>http://www.tickerhound.com/feed/user/ATMA/asked/feed.rss</link>
		<description>TickerHound.com Question Feed - user: ATMA's asked questions</description>
		<dc:language>en-us</dc:language>
		<dc:creator>contact@tickerhound.com</dc:creator>
		<dc:rights>Copyright 2009</dc:rights>
		<admin:generatorAgent rdf:resource="http://www.tickerhound.com/" />

		
        <item>
			<title>Do you think it&#39;s a good idea for OPEC to push up oil prices with their production cuts?</title>
			<link>http://www.tickerhound.com/questions/detail/200903cdefdc7/do-you-think-it-s-a-good-idea-for-opec-to-push-up-oil-prices-with-their-production-cuts</link>
			<guid>http://www.tickerhound.com/questions/detail/200903cdefdc7/do-you-think-it-s-a-good-idea-for-opec-to-push-up-oil-prices-with-their-production-cuts</guid>
			<description>While the world economy is suffering? Wouldn&#39;t that cause a rise in inflation and potentially lead to stagflation?

Would suppressed oil prices in the medium term keep material prices down and help the economy recover faster? </description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2009 21:41:28 -0400</pubDate>
        </item>
		
        <item>
			<title>&quot;The price of stock has very little to do with the company it represents.&quot;</title>
			<link>http://www.tickerhound.com/questions/detail/2009024e1d1a3/the-price-of-stock-has-very-little-to-do-with-the-company-it-represents</link>
			<guid>http://www.tickerhound.com/questions/detail/2009024e1d1a3/the-price-of-stock-has-very-little-to-do-with-the-company-it-represents</guid>
			<description>That was quoted from Dr. Alexander Elder&#39;s book, Trading for a living. This seem to agree with the fact that the market prices is often irrational.

Now, if that&#39;s true MOST times, does that mean we can throw out fundamental analysis? Since the goal of FA is to find how much is the company/stock worth, buy at a discount and hope the market will be rational some day and price it accordingly.

Would we be better off just looking at dividend yields? </description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 2009 09:56:44 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
		
        <item>
			<title>Is there really such thing as more buyers than sellers and vice versa?</title>
			<link>http://www.tickerhound.com/questions/detail/2009024871669/is-there-really-such-thing-as-more-buyers-than-sellers-and-vice-versa</link>
			<guid>http://www.tickerhound.com/questions/detail/2009024871669/is-there-really-such-thing-as-more-buyers-than-sellers-and-vice-versa</guid>
			<description>For a trade to happen there must be a buyer and a seller.

So how does the system even know how many buyers or sellers are there? Since the number of buyers and sellers (in terms of the number of shares) must be the same for trade to happen.

When a company has some bad news, the stock dives. But for the stock price to dive (in large volume) there must enough foolish buyers of the stock, otherwise the price wouldn&#39;t dive at all since there&#39;s no trade. Is there some part of the system I don&#39;t understand or are there simply that many foolish buyers out there?

If there are no buyers, you can&#39;t even short the stock right? </description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 2009 10:04:00 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
		
        <item>
			<title>Inverse relationship btwn US$ and Commodity prices, why is that?</title>
			<link>http://www.tickerhound.com/questions/detail/200811ce68ecb/inverse-relationship-btwn-us-and-commodity-prices-why-is-that</link>
			<guid>http://www.tickerhound.com/questions/detail/200811ce68ecb/inverse-relationship-btwn-us-and-commodity-prices-why-is-that</guid>
			<description>Q1: This applies mostly to US$ priced commodities right?nnQ2) I have no economics background, but see if my logic is rightnn(1) US$ value goes up, more expensive to convert local currency to buy US$ priced commodity, demand falls, price fallsn(2) US$ value goes up, per unit dollar gets you more units of commodity. Thus, per unit price of commodity falls.nnIf my logic is wrong can someone explain why is the inverse relationship so? Thanks guys! </description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2008 23:49:59 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
		
        <item>
			<title>What is the best book written about Options trading?</title>
			<link>http://www.tickerhound.com/questions/detail/200810f51bd93/what-is-the-best-book-written-about-options-trading</link>
			<guid>http://www.tickerhound.com/questions/detail/200810f51bd93/what-is-the-best-book-written-about-options-trading</guid>
			<description>and not about the basics, I can learn that from the net. I mean trading strategies etc... </description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2008 20:13:57 -0400</pubDate>
        </item>
		
        <item>
			<title>Up&#45;trend down&#45;trend use of RSI</title>
			<link>http://www.tickerhound.com/questions/detail/200809922c07f/up-trend-down-trend-use-of-rsi</link>
			<guid>http://www.tickerhound.com/questions/detail/200809922c07f/up-trend-down-trend-use-of-rsi</guid>
			<description>In one of Chris Rowe&#39;s (Tycoon Report) article on the US$, he mentioned that RSI&#39;s are good at calling tops in down&#45;trends and bottoms in up&#45;trends.

Why is that? What&#39;s the mechanics behind it? </description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2008 23:20:20 -0400</pubDate>
        </item>
		
        <item>
			<title>How does increasing interest rates counter inflation?</title>
			<link>http://www.tickerhound.com/questions/detail/20080613905676/how-does-increasing-interest-rates-counter-inflation</link>
			<guid>http://www.tickerhound.com/questions/detail/20080613905676/how-does-increasing-interest-rates-counter-inflation</guid>
			<description>And doesn&#39;t it make borrowing for businesses more expensive? </description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jun 2008 00:43:40 -0400</pubDate>
        </item>
		
        <item>
			<title>Why is depreciation a positive value in the Operating portion in the Cashflow statement?</title>
			<link>http://www.tickerhound.com/questions/detail/20080559c70e0/why-is-depreciation-a-positive-value-in-the-operating-portion-in-the-cashflow-statement</link>
			<guid>http://www.tickerhound.com/questions/detail/20080559c70e0/why-is-depreciation-a-positive-value-in-the-operating-portion-in-the-cashflow-statement</guid>
			<description>&lt;a target=&quot;_NEW&quot; href=&quot;http://www.tickerhound.com/questions/detail/2008031a069bdb&quot;&gt;http://www.tickerhound.com/questions/detail/2008031a069bdb&lt;/a&gt; says that depreciation is a non&#45;cash expense which reduces a company&#39;s earnings, meaning it would be a negative value in the income statement (am i right?).

So, the reason depreciation is positive in the cashflow statement is just to offset this? So if depreciation is &#45;1mil in the income statement, there will be a positive depreciation acccount of +1mil in the cashflow statement.

Did i got it right?</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2008 21:06:09 -0400</pubDate>
        </item>
		
        <item>
			<title>Which financial ratios you use and why?</title>
			<link>http://www.tickerhound.com/questions/detail/200805611c27b/which-financial-ratios-you-use-and-why</link>
			<guid>http://www.tickerhound.com/questions/detail/200805611c27b/which-financial-ratios-you-use-and-why</guid>
			<description>I&#39;m a beginner wanting to learn more about interpreting financial reports. There are tons of different financial ratios.

Which are the ones you consistently use and why?
And which are the ones you do not use and why?</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2008 02:56:05 -0400</pubDate>
        </item>
		
        <item>
			<title>Futures basics</title>
			<link>http://www.tickerhound.com/questions/detail/20080316b69401/futures-basics</link>
			<guid>http://www.tickerhound.com/questions/detail/20080316b69401/futures-basics</guid>
			<description>When explaining about futures, people often give the example of sugar futures where instead of waiting the contract due and receive a truckload of sugar, people sell the contract for a profit.

My rookie question is, what happens to the last guy holding the contract? Does he really receive the underlying commodity which is this case, sugar?</description>
			<pubDate>Sat, 22 Mar 2008 05:16:16 -0400</pubDate>
        </item>
			</channel>
</rss>
