[teddyboy]

Hi guyz,

Just a thought. We get a lot of new members here and its getting far more prominent. So what I suggest is something like this.

The way we have WHAT THE PAPERS SAID is brilliant because if you read the whole lot, you feel as if you are experiencing it. So what about on the Wiki we have a section for each months media activity. In this section we have the BEAR NEWS and BULL NEWS for that month (let show impartiality here).

Then we can see how the media are reporting the market. We know that from January, its been nothing but BULLSHIT reporting which we now know is probably a last ditch attempt to boulster the market. Unfortunately, the sheeple do listen to this. So report that as this will be a great archive when it goes tits up.

So it might be
January 2006

BULL
Markets great (Source: Halifax)
Flying off shelves (Source: Johnn Wigglebottom)
Mortgage Approvals soaring (Source: CML)
HPI up 6.8% (Source: Spring in the Air)
Economy Rosy (Source: Gordon Brown)

BEAR
Prices went down 4% in Newmarket (Source: Land Registry)


.........

..
APRIL 2006
BULL
Price up 0.1% this month (Source: Nationwide)

BEAR
IR's need to rise (Source: IFA)
Property Sales plummet (Source: LR)
Properties per agent soar (Rightmove website)
BTL's selling up in London (Source: Sumwebpage)
Blatant ramping by K&P (Source: CH4 website)


So each month just make a section for BULL and BEAR and then we add a BULL headline with a link to that THREAD. Do the same for the BEARS.

Lets put JUST the most RELEVANT stories here. If we see that the majority of reports are bullish then we can see that sentiment in the media is BULLISH. Now we are starting to see a lot of BEAR articles, and we can feel that SENTIMENT in the MEDIA is going BEARISH.

It's a great indicator and if someone wants a quick summary of where we are, at any given time. I believe this is the best way of compiling it. So set something up similar to the what the papers said and make it "what the media say"

NOW the problem.
We need to delegate a few people to make these sections and links. No disrespect to realist bear but this section would be 12 pages long as he believes everything is relevant Same for TTRT on the Bull side. so this would mean some sort of moderation. Or it would just become a forum, within a forum - which is pointless. I also think it would be important to state the source in the title as above.

This will be a great starting point for newbies as well. Lets be fair now. Most people only get one paper or look at 1 website. They can get quick links to stories being published in MEDIA that they would never have come across. When dispelling myths to their 'mockers' they can point them to this section so they can read the online version of it. With it being a link to an external site they cannot discredit it as HPC spin.

I know this means a bit of work but I think its a good idea?

If you think its a pile of shyte, then fine, say so - I'm thick skinned.

TB

This post has been edited by teddyboy: 28 April 2006 - 09:28 PM

[needle]

www.bullnotbull.com

[teddyboy]

needle, on Apr 28 2006, 11:48 PM, said:

www.bullnotbull.com

yeah -similar thing (good find)

But it looks like there is a BULL / NO BULL / NEUTRAL per day.

I was thinking more of a news round-up of ONLY significant things. IE If Rightmove report rises of 10% for exapmle then there are probably 30 or 40 possible stories from this. What I am saying is that this is a BULL report so report AS IS from the source. If someone 'shoots this down' or says it is flawed then put their take on it, in the bears section, and vice versa. This gives a balanced story. As we know, from the same press release the BBC may report that 50 /100 DIED whilst SKY may put 50/100 SURVIVED. Creative journalism.

It would be nice to report both sides of these reports so people can see that there are 2 sides to every story. (BULL OR BEAR)

I do not propose picking all the bear articles and ignore the bulls. Put a balanced view on them and then link to the post for that article and argue it out there. In a structured way, this will be a great indicator of MEDIA sentiment.

TB

This post has been edited by teddyboy: 28 April 2006 - 11:05 PM