11 replies to this topic

[Russ]

If the bulls are right why has market failed 6 times(days) to get through the 1450 resistance?

[relax]

If the bears are right why haven't they used the consistently poor data to force a strong move down?

Really surprises me how weak the bears are, but let's see what happens friday

If the bulls are right why has market failed 6 times(days) to get through the 1450 resistance?

[Russ]

Bears cannot force a market down, it is the buyers that are keeping it up but they can't get through the gap. They can only hold their arm up in the air for so long - entropy.

If the bears are right why haven't they used the consistently poor data to force a strong move down?

Really surprises me how weak the bears are, but let's see what happens friday

If the bulls are right why has market failed 6 times(days) to get through the 1450 resistance?

[fib_1618]

Bears cannot force a market down

So what happened on February 27th?

Fib

[mss]

Bears cannot force a market down

So what happened on February 27th?

Fib

A lack of bulls.

[.Blizzard]

Bears cannot force a market down

So what happened on February 27th?

Fib

pushed wrong buttons?

[Russ]

Lack of buyers could not support it. Due to increasing awareness of Armstrong's 8.6 year cycle I think we saw evidence of massive selling that overwhelmed the Cramer's of the world. If the sellers tried it last summer they would have found prices rising despite their selling. A major panic cycle at an over-extended bull run may be the exception to the rule though, you may be right. It seems to be a combination of lack of buyers and lots of sellers.

There was a study done after the crash of 87 as to what caused it , the Brady Commision, Martin Armstrong was part of that study, they concluded a lack of buyers is what caused it to drop precipitously.

Bears cannot force a market down

So what happened on February 27th?

Fib

[fib_1618]

they concluded a lack of buyers is what caused it to drop precipitously

Even today this conclusion is rather humorous, wouldn't you say? What was said in essence was: "We don't really know why the market lost 20% in one day, but we know how to fix the problem! Here you go, circuit breakers - that way instead of losing 20% in a day, we can stair step our way to a bottom!"

Here's the real question though as it would apply to 1987:

What exactly was the technical cause of this lack of buying that created the effect of this same one day event?

As far as Armstrong's 8.6 year cycle is concerned, I find it very hard to believe that 98% of the trading public knew about this and suddenly realized their mistake. However, I'm also aware of the fact that if everyone starts to trade on the same information a cascading effect can result - especially if there's only one revolving door to go through.

From my end, the market was wound up tighter than a snare drum for 2 weeks prior to the 27th, and since it was huffing and puffing while climbing the mountain it created from last summer, it had no other choice but to exhale and rest.

Fib

[relax]

Well two weeks prior to the 27 th it was wound up, but is was really wound for months before that
And what happened the 27 th - looking at the levels for Shanghai Composite and the German DAX and several other indices - they're saying nothing mattered - no technical damage at all, just the usual correction

expect for the US, which still has big resistance levels ahead

I can't help look at the data coming out of the US for the last three months - really poor - i'm afraid that Bernanke has reacted to late in terms of lowering rates - rates need to be lowered before there are atually signs of it needing to be lowered

With the poor data - well why aren't markets lower - is the data ahead of the technical picture or is the technical picture telling us that there is so much buying power on the sidelines that the market is simply waiting for some good data, so the market can start a new series of inevitable gains

well i'm not convinced - S&P 500 1.440 - i need to see it broken

going to sleep - no trading in Europe thursday - but i guess we're all waiting for friday (and more disappointing data, which yet again can't create any bear force)

Enjoy your trading tomorrow ;-)

they concluded a lack of buyers is what caused it to drop precipitously

Even today this conclusion is rather humorous, wouldn't you say? What was said in essence was: "We don't really know why the market lost 20% in one day, but we know how to fix the problem! Here you go, circuit breakers - that way instead of losing 20% in a day, we can stair step our way to a bottom!"

Here's the real question though as it would apply to 1987:

What exactly was the technical cause of this lack of buying that created the effect of this same one day event?

As far as Armstrong's 8.6 year cycle is concerned, I find it very hard to believe that 98% of the trading public knew about this and suddenly realized their mistake. However, I'm also aware of the fact that if everyone starts to trade on the same information a cascading effect can result - especially if there's only one revolving door to go through.

From my end, the market was wound up tighter than a snare drum for 2 weeks prior to the 27th, and since it was huffing and puffing while climbing the mountain it created from last summer, it had no other choice but to exhale and rest.

Fib

[Russ]

Acording to Armstrong's research what happened back then is the G5 got together and decided they needed to lower the US dollar and this led to capital flowing out of the US and into places like Japan which then went on to rally having the Nikkei peak in late 1989 right on Armstrong's model when he told the Japanese that the Nikkei would drop 20,000 points in the coming 10 months.

Additionally 1985 was the start of his 51.6 year 'Confidence in Private Markets' Cycle and research shows that panics increase by 100% during a private cycle, 1987 was the first panic of the new private cycle which will end in 2037 which would be equivalent to 1934 from the end of the last private cycle.

they concluded a lack of buyers is what caused it to drop precipitously

Even today this conclusion is rather humorous, wouldn't you say? What was said in essence was: "We don't really know why the market lost 20% in one day, but we know how to fix the problem! Here you go, circuit breakers - that way instead of losing 20% in a day, we can stair step our way to a bottom!"

Here's the real question though as it would apply to 1987:

What exactly was the technical cause of this lack of buying that created the effect of this same one day event?

As far as Armstrong's 8.6 year cycle is concerned, I find it very hard to believe that 98% of the trading public knew about this and suddenly realized their mistake. However, I'm also aware of the fact that if everyone starts to trade on the same information a cascading effect can result - especially if there's only one revolving door to go through.

From my end, the market was wound up tighter than a snare drum for 2 weeks prior to the 27th, and since it was huffing and puffing while climbing the mountain it created from last summer, it had no other choice but to exhale and rest.

Fib