ikubak
Recycles dryer sheets
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2007
- Messages
- 482
I know there has been a lot of press for this "Hindenburg Omen" but this headline and subsequent verbiage caught my eye.
Here is the headline:
The Hindenburg Omen IS Scary, but So Are the Fundamentals
Then, in the article it says: The Hindenburg Omen has a roughly 25% accuracy rate in predicting big market upheaval since 1987, meaning it's far from infallible but isn't inconsequential either.
I read this and think, oh, Hindenburg Omen, wrong 75% of the time. Nothing to see here, move along people. Now I know our media peeps got to sell ads and all, but if you are going to scare folks, wouldn't you go with something with a slightly better than .250 batting average?
Here is the headline:
The Hindenburg Omen IS Scary, but So Are the Fundamentals
Then, in the article it says: The Hindenburg Omen has a roughly 25% accuracy rate in predicting big market upheaval since 1987, meaning it's far from infallible but isn't inconsequential either.
I read this and think, oh, Hindenburg Omen, wrong 75% of the time. Nothing to see here, move along people. Now I know our media peeps got to sell ads and all, but if you are going to scare folks, wouldn't you go with something with a slightly better than .250 batting average?