Cramer's Rule? Urgent!?
918980
You are in for a long night if you can't use a calculator to find determinants, because Cramer's Rule with 4 equations needs to have five 4X4 determinants evaluated.  Anyway.....\n\nTo find the first variable, make a fraction with a determinant formed by taking the 4 coefficients from each of the 4 equations on the bottom of the fraction, and a determinant formed by taking that bottom determinant and replacing the First column of coefficients with the answer column on the top of the fraction.  Then evaluate each determinant to get your first variable.\n\nTo find the second variable, the bottom determinant is the same but this time on top replace the Second column of coefficients with the answers.\n\nEtc, etc.\n\nDon't stay up too late; I am going to bed.  Good luck!
598926
The stock is still in a strong downward trend.\n\nIf you observe on the chart, you will notice 2 trend lines, one is still showing a strong downward trend and the other acting as a strong resistance.\n\nI suggest buying when both trend intersacts and purchase at that price, or you can drop me a mail if you require further analysis.
925132
TimGNO is correct, although a pedant would point out that he hasn't shown this point is a maximum.  But  it is common sense.  See my response to the second time you asked the question, I got the same answer (foolishly mucking around with tangents), but make a couple of other observations you may wish to look at.
50225
I'm a fan of Jim Cramer's Action Alerts Plus. Cramer tells people "Don't just buy what I suggest. Do some research on your own." He explains (in everyday language) why he thinks certain stocks will do well or not.\n\nWatch "Mad Money" on CNBC. If you like Cramer, then try a free trial of the newsletter.\n\nI agree with previous answers, most newsletters are crap.
894473
Any equation explaning the relationship between two or more observations (or data points) could be called a regression. It's really an extrapolation of the underlying line (or non-linear relationship) that explains the variance.\n\nPerhaps you could do a simple one- pick a stock and use the closing price over a period (say 3 weeks, 15 observations). Then try to come up with a formula to explain the pattern.\n\nActually, that one is kind of hard without stats software. But there are others- such as average temperatures in a given area...
863028
Is that really the question?  Prob of a normal variable being greater than the mean?  It's just 0.5.  What's the real question, and what has Z to do with it?
902313
Since the constant term is negative, the signs must be opposites. A little trial and error shows the answer to \nbe (x + 6)(x - 1)
779163
The correct answer is 4,-5. A simple check confirms that \n7*4-5*5=28-25=3\n3*4+2*5=12+10 =22\n\nUsing Cramer's rule...\n\n.....|3....5|\n.....|22.-2| \nx= --------\n.....|7....5|\n.....|3...-2|\n\nWhich equals:\n\n(3*-2 - 22*5)\n----------------\n(7*-2 - 3*5)\n\nWhich equals:\n\n(-6 - 110)\n------------\n(-12 - 15)\n\nWhich equals\n\n(-116)/(-29) = 4. So x = 4.\n\nWe could now go back and substitute easily to get that y is -5. But using Cramer's rule once again...\n\n.....|7....3|\n.....|3..22| \ny= --------\n.....|7....5|\n.....|3...-2|\n\nWhich equals:\n\n(7*22 - 3*3)\n----------------\n(7*-2 - 3*5)\n\nWhich equals:\n\n(154 - 9)\n------------\n(-12 - 15)\n\nWhich equals\n\n(145)/(-29) = -5. So y = -5.\n\n\nPerhaps two easier ways to do it are by elimination or substitution:\n\nElimination:\n7x+5y=3\n3x-2y=22\n\n21x + 15y = 9\n21x - 14y = 154\n\n29y = -154\ny = -5\n\nHere we could go back and substitute, or continue with the elimination. I'll leave you to verify either way that x = 4.\n\nSubstitution:\n7x+5y=3\n7x = 3 - 5y\nx = (3 - 5y)/7\n\n3x-2y=22\n\n3(3 - 5y)/7 -2y = 22\n(9 - 15y)/7 - 2y = 22\n(9 - 15y)/7 - (14y/7) = 22\n(9 - 15y - 14y)/7 = 22\n9 - 29y = 154\n-29y = 145\ny = -5\n\nOnce again, you could substitute again or substitute back into the original equations. I'll leave you to verify that x=4.\n\n--------------------\n\nAlthough I used Cramer's rule to find both variables, once you have one, I mentioned it is easier to substitute to find the other. This applies to elimination and substitution as well. For example, once you know that x=4...\n\n7x+5y = 3\n7*4 + 5y = 3\n28 + 5y = 3\n5y = -25\ny = -5.\n\nThis works substitution either variable into either equation.\n\nHope this helps ^_^!
963213
The answer is a huge short term effect... read this...\n\nhttp://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/cramerbounce.asp\n\n\nHe is a previous successful hedge fund manager, so he deserves some credit.\n\nThanks ahead for the best answer vote.
90357
F- even and odds.  There are 3 even sides and 3 odd sides. So the likelihood is the same for both.
236313
Wouldn't the probability than 5 of the 38 thought it was exciting be\n\n38C5(.79^5)(.21^33) = 6.63x10^-18 : basically impossible?  Even if you added in the probabilities of 4, 3, 2, 1, and 0, it's still tiny.\n\nSo I would infer that either the 79% is wrong or the sample was not independently chosen.
1077002
Your estimation is dead on!  Nice job!\n\n100 Shares of a $300 stock, plus commission = $30010.\n\nTo find the exact break even point, I use the following equation:\n\n(P x 100) - $10 = 30010.  Where P is the final stock price.  With a little algebra, I can find P = 300.20  so the stock needs to rise from $300 to $300.20 per share.  What is the % increase?\n\n0.20 / 300 = 0.00067, or 0.067%.  Sounds like the person is using "percent of percent" [sometimes called "basis points"] rather than percent.
722297
Whoah!  Hold the bus!  The advice that includes gregarious reactionaries and traders like Cramer or commodities needs to be held off with the proverbial "ten-foot pole."\n\nGo to CNN Money, Motley Fool, MSN Money, Netscape Investing etc. which will give you a clear, comparatively safe starter advice.  Ask your broker (I recommend Scottrade, sharebuilder, or schwab) about some Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) like Diamonds or Spydrs or the like--these let you buy a cheap sampling of the Dow Jones Industrials or the Standard & Poors 500, comparatively safe but still very good, profitable companies.  They are about as sexy as steak and potatoes, but they are as substantial as steak and potatoes.  \n\nAs for individual companies, first--does it make a profit?  As for any other features, news, or events, first, does it make a profit?  Second, does it have a triple-digit price to earnings ratio?  Then there are too many people thinking it will be big and it won't likely be big enough to please them all.  If you divide the profit by number of shares (most stock sites will give this information for free, usually doing the arithmetic for you), and the result is higher than 30-something, stay away.  If the number is a negative number, go back to the other rule, first, does it make a profit.
199508
I offer my alert not long ago to stay a from Jim Cramer promote the stocks on CNBC.  I suspected him and his producer using the pump and dump scam.  Most of the stocks he recommended are up only to fall back in a short period of time.
191357
I think that Cramer is wrong more times than he is right.  People seem to like his exhuberance, though.  Not me.
148216
i think the best place to go for investing is "jim cramers real money". I read this book and it is very helpful. It's definitely a great place to start.
415757
I hate to tell you, but I don't think there is an algebraic method for arriving at a value for x. Sometimes, this can be the case, in which case all you can do is find a numeric approximation, here around x=1.0587...\n\nI'll see if another user can prove me wrong, but I'm going to go with there's no way to solve this problem using analytic methods.