The Most Pathetic Barron’s Article Ever
August 24, 2008
Entitled : How to Simplify Your Stock Research, Barron’s author Mike Hogan attempts to deliver an article to provide some help when researching stocks, yet it does nothing of the sort. Instead it discusses how Google Docs can be used to gather information and Google’s Notebook is a good organizational tool.
THE WEB OFFERS SO MANY INTERESTING INVESTMENT
articles and so much provocative research, it can be tough to find just the needle or two you want. Every search produces a haystack of information. But there are tools that can help, and many — like Google Notebook (http://google.com/notebook) and Zoho Notebook (http://notebook.zoho.com) — are both Web-based and free.Gaining investment insights from Web pages sounds like such a simple task; and it would be, if most pages weren’t highly formatted collections of incompatible file types. Increasingly, blogs
and news sites like Barron’s (www.barrons.com) and research services like Morningstar (www.morningstar.com) are mixing graphic charts and video sidebars with their text reports. Traditional research sources like S&P (www2.standardandpoors.com) typically offer their work as downloadable PDF or spreadsheet files.No single desktop or Web-based application accepts all these elements without compromise. But both the Google and Zoho notebooks do a good job of accommodating the differences, so that you can round up content from a lot of sources on a lot of topics
simultaneously.
Did you notice that he does point out that Barron’s is starting to mix graphic charts in their web pages? I almost think that this article was written 5 years ago and somehow mysteriously just appeared on the site.
Has it really gotten this bador am I just grouchy this morning?
(* By the way - I love the Zoho.com apps!)
Tags: ResearchRelated posts
Comments
One Response to “The Most Pathetic Barron’s Article Ever”
Got something to say?
Subscribe



hahaha! Barron’s author doesn’t know that Barron’s used charts every since BarronsOnline started. He should be fired. A 10-year could write a better article than that.