IBD...

[showmethemoney]

I did a search for IBD (in this forum) and came up with a lot of mentions of it but nothing that I found went in depth, can anyone that subcribes (or has knowledge of) to IBD tell me exactly what they get, I went to the website and there are so many things you can subscribe to I dont know what is what. Also is it worth it, in your opinion of course. Any info about it would be great.

[Bman409]

I did a search for IBD (in this forum) and came up with a lot of mentions of it but nothing that I found went in depth, can anyone that subcribes (or has knowledge of) to IBD tell me exactly what they get, I went to the website and there are so many things you can subscribe to I dont know what is what. Also is it worth it, in your opinion of course. Any info about it would be great.

I subscribed a few years ago, but dropped it

The paper is loaded full of stock statistics, if you're into that.. but very little I couldnt' get off the internet.

They do have good lists of "the top 100" performing stocks at any given time.. and lists of sector rankings, etc

I couldn't stomach their obsessive pro-Republican bias, however.. which is evident in nearly every article

I cancelled it.

[aiki14]

I like the stock statistics in a one stop shop kind of format. The Top 100 stocks is pretty good for long term plays. The online stocks on the move table is also good for intra-day price volume moves.
The republican bias is a bit disturbing but if you know it going in it's tolerable. I get both the paper and online versions and will continue the subscription, I like having a morning paper to read and chase the dogs with. I don't subscribe to any of the premium services they offer.

[ronjeremy912]

I thought non republicans bought bonds? :D

[Bman409]

I thought non republicans bought bonds? :D

I'm an independent, but I just can't take dishonest journalism, whether it be the NY Times or IBD

IBD has to be one of the worst offenders on either side of the political spectrum however.

For example, if the stock market went up when CLinton was President, it was "in spite of" the President, or they'd make a big deal of saying that the President had little effect on the economy.

Now, however, the stock market goes up "because of Bush's policies" and they've reversed their position that the PResident should get little of the credit.

Personally, I think the President has far less effect than Congress, and both of them combined have a negligible effect on the stock market, compared to the Federal Reserve, who actually runs the show..

But I digress.. .

in any case, I can't tolerate political propaganda in my business news... which is why I don't subscribe to either IBD, or any left wing rags for that matter.

Just my two cents

If you like data, however, IBD is a great source for it.