Fair enough. I consider it a high quality paper, stock-analysis wise. I’d swear, the last dozen IBD editorials I’ve read have been unequivocally and unabashedly capitalistic, conservative, etc; That’s why I was surprised to see a proven, flaming liberal idiot like Eugene Robinson published in it!
The market, as we know, goes through periods where fundamentals matter a lot, and other periods where they are utterly irrelvant. I consider us to be in the latter phase now. FWIW.
I know and know of a few guys who use IBDs’ tools quite extensively...perhaps Gary Kaltbaum is the most well known. He has a daily internet & over the air radio show where he follows the market. I consider him pretty savvy and his show is pretty good. Another trader guy I know lives in LA. Haven’t kept up with him, but I suspect he wiped himself out!
It’s pretty hard to argue with O’Neill’s appraoch, it’s quite comprehensive and certainly grounded in historical example and classic money management. But as I said, often times the market couldn’t care less about classic fundamentals.
Maybe it was one of those equal time things. Probably should fire the editor for costing the paper subscribers, and scrutinizing the board for screwing up with their fiduciary responsibilities.