The Stock Market

[AlexLah]

Fully agree Abrak.

[Parvis]

I tend to agree with you. I believe what most self-described "Fundamentalists" don't appear to realize is that Charts are nothing but a graphical representation of fundamentals normally used by highly educated/trained professionals. "Sentiment" changes ever so slightly before "Fundamentals" - which you can only notice in Graphs - not magazine articles.

Ooooh we are getting a bit difficult here.....

To any 'rational' investment professional a chart of a company's share price will not reflect underlying fundamentals. To assume it does needs massively heroic assumptions 'such as an assumption of perfect information' combined with an ignorance of the fact that share price graphs do not reflect the 'resulting random walk' that you would see from that assumption. Actually they know underlying fundamentals change far less than underlying sentiment.

How does a stock that was trading at Bt8 a year ago reflect the fact that it just reported Bt5.5 EPS in the first quarter of this year? From a fundamental standpoint?

You simply cannot equate share price graphs with 'a graphical representation of fundamentals' simply because fundamentals do not have the underlying volatility that is represented in those share price graphs.

I am not suggesting that you can read all the information I would like to see from a simple "Price Chart". IF that is the best you can do than you have to rely on dozens of standard indicators which you can suit for your needs to at least have a "fighting chance". In addition you would be able to read chart patterns - support and resistance - which improves your chances - but are not totally reliable. With the above information you are unlikely to "predict" a significant change in valuation.

In this particular case you are fighting the fact that it is a "penny stock" therefore trading is volatile in both price and volume. Volume (up, down, total) may not even be available on a timely basis. If you had all volumes available you could construct a formula which encompasses all in one single line at the same scale as your price chart and overlaid on your price chart - which would give you reasonably reliable buy/sell signals. Most likely you would have seen "something was happening" in this particular stock weeks before an anouncement. (This volume squiggly line would be your sentiment - in this case).

But to construct a formula of this type you should be able to read my posting of a certain formula 2 weeks or so ago - or at least understand what it was. In all well constructed charts of this type you have typically 2 lines - Standard and deviation.

Edited May 30, 2010 by Parvis

[badge]

Imagine if someone told you it would rain tomorrow, and it didnt, and not only did it not rain, it was the hottest day for 20 years.

Then again they told you it would rain tomorrow, and it didnt.

Then again they told you it would rain tomorrow, and it didnt.

My question is, how much notice can one be expected to give the chap, when he has anything to say about the weather?

[sokal]

how many chart bugs seen India buying 200 tons of gold ? None

how many chart bugs called the flash crash ? none

[Gambles]

Gambles, while I am on your side in the fundamental camp, the likes of most chartists would actually argue that what they are in touch with is far more 'real, tangible and human' than your universe based on logic and analysis.

Ultimately chartists focus on our underlying psychology and assume that to an extent underlying knowledge is fully discounted (i.e. shall we say an essential 'rational expectations' approach to valuation - price random walk etc.)

If you were to say take the existence of 'phi' and then consider how theoretically it is of so much mathematical importance, you would realize that it is the 'fundamentalists' rather than the 'chartists' who perhaps do not understand things. Or shall we say ignore such matters to their detriment. I will always be a fundamentalist because I understand logic and theory. But, to the extent, that chartists understand underlying psychology, I respect that. In fact, the understanding of human psychology will only work in the short term. In the long run all stocks prices are based on their underlying fundamentals.

Or look it another way. The chartists basically take advantage of underlying 'mass psychology' to trade. That is fine so long as 'fundamentalists' actually take advantage of that psychological flaw and understand that prices will eventually move towards a fundamental equilibrium.

Don't get me wrong, I see a value in technicals and chartism in terms of reading market sentiment. I always find Belkin's commentaries and his models extremely provocative and interesting.

Other than that, as usual, you articulated it way better than I did....

Edited May 30, 2010 by Gambles

[midas]

Imagine if someone told you it would rain tomorrow, and it didnt, and not only did it not rain, it was the hottest day for 20 years.

Then again they told you it would rain tomorrow, and it didnt.

Then again they told you it would rain tomorrow, and it didnt.

My question is, how much notice can one be expected to give the chap, when he has anything to say about the weather?

I still dont see how it can be that if the Parvis method of trading is able to correctly represent sentiment and he still has unshakeable

confidence we are in a Bull market still to go up further, why is his " method " still drowning out these warnings ?

Now Everyone Thinks The Market's Going To Crash

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/henry-blodg...5#ixzz0pXAcTHtu

[Parvis]

how many chart bugs seen India buying 200 tons of gold ? None

how many chart bugs called the flash crash ? none

On the subject of "Flash Crashes":

1) What are Flash Crashes?

2) What is the Technical Significance of Flash Crashes?

3) How often do Flash Crashes occur?

4) Did we not have another Flash Crash only 4 Trading Days ago - slightly undercutting the previous per DJI (by 100 points)?

5) Why does a Flash Crash always appear to point at the general level of the eventual bottom?

6) How can you determine when this level is reached - it is actually the bottom?

Edited May 31, 2010 by Parvis

[Gambles]

Imagine if someone told you it would rain tomorrow, and it didnt, and not only did it not rain, it was the hottest day for 20 years.

Then again they told you it would rain tomorrow, and it didnt.

Then again they told you it would rain tomorrow, and it didnt.

My question is, how much notice can one be expected to give the chap, when he has anything to say about the weather?

Interestingly rainfall in some instances is basically best predicted using the serial correlation techniques that CTAs and other hedge fund strategies tend to rely on....

I don't know any that relay on Parvis' model though....but there are many that are technical driven

[Gambles]

Allison Pollard?

Now you know - she is gay

http://en.netlog.com/pce1707

Actually I think she is 'bi-passive' but presumably that wasnt an option on the website.

Why do I suddenly feel like the bassist in the J Geils Band....

[Gambles]

Or look it another way. The chartists basically take advantage of underlying 'mass psychology' to trade. That is fine so long as 'fundamentalists' actually take advantage of that psychological flaw and understand that prices will eventually move towards a fundamental equilibrium.

Although I agree with you to an extent.

Somebody once said (was it Bill Williams?) That the markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent. Although fundamentals will eventually have their impact on the markets, they have been and always will be more influenced by sentiment.

When fundamentals and a trend agree, it's time to climb aboard that trend.

As far as I am concerned, fundamentals support a bear market and when sentiment does turn totally bearish, I will climb aboard that train.

I always understood that it was Keynes who first said it when he had to mortgage his Royalties for "The General Theory" after some bets went badly wrong (in terms of timing) in the early '30s but I'm sure it's been very widely used since then

[Gambles]

I tend to agree with you. I believe what most self-described "Fundamentalists" don't appear to realize is that Charts are nothing but a graphical representation of fundamentals normally used by highly educated/trained professionals. "Sentiment" changes ever so slightly before "Fundamentals" - which you can only notice in Graphs - not magazine articles.

Ooooh we are getting a bit difficult here.....

To any 'rational' investment professional a chart of a company's share price will not reflect underlying fundamentals. To assume it does needs massively heroic assumptions 'such as an assumption of perfect information' combined with an ignorance of the fact that share price graphs do not reflect the 'resulting random walk' that you would see from that assumption. Actually they know underlying fundamentals change far less than underlying sentiment.

How does a stock that was trading at Bt8 a year ago reflect the fact that it just reported Bt5.5 EPS in the first quarter of this year? From a fundamental standpoint?

You simply cannot equate share price graphs with 'a graphical representation of fundamentals' simply because fundamentals do not have the underlying volatility that is represented in those share price graphs.

I thought all the rational hypothesists had long been carried out and buried?

[Parvis]

Interestingly rainfall in some instances is basically best predicted using the serial correlation techniques that CTAs and other hedge fund strategies tend to rely on....

I don't know any that relay on Parvis' model though....but there are many that are technical driven

Gambles

I don't think you yet know what "model" I am using and I tend to believe my "model" MAY be different than most (Ahh - but he says he is different). My objective may also be different than most - namely to determine "tradeable opportunities" in both directions. Those tradeable opportunities tend to be rather "volatile" at potential Market turns - and - tradeable in both directions.

While I believe this correction was a "fairly normal correction" in a bull Market - I am certainly not yet sure of it - so far. While I tend to be bullish (by nature optimistic) - I also have not yet seen the EXACT bottom - per my theory.

Edited May 31, 2010 by Parvis

[sokal]

how many chart bugs seen India buying 200 tons of gold ? None

how many chart bugs called the flash crash ? none

On the subject of "Flash Crashes":

1) What are Flash Crashes?

2) What is the Technical Significance of Flash Crashes?

3) How often do Flash Crashes occur?

4) Did we not have another Flash Crash only 4 Trading Days ago - slightly undercutting the previous per DJI (by 100 points)?

5) Why does a Flash Crash always appear to point at the general level of the eventual bottom?

6) How can you determine when this level is reached - it is actually the bottom?

1)may 6 09

2)i dunno, not a technician but I do know that the flash crash lows where revisited not long after.

3)they only need to occur once to render technical analysis useless

4)no, but did the techies call that one ?

5)a bottom for what ? that day or week ? until the next flash crash that the techies cant predict ?

6)I don't claim to know where a bottom is. Invest hedge fund style, bet big on medium to long term outcomes. It doesn't matter where the bottom is, as long as I have my mid to long term fundamentals right.

[midas]

Commodities’ Biggest Drop Since Lehman Bear Signal

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...ojf6w&pos=2

[Gambles]

Gambles

I don't think you yet know what "model" I am using and I tend to believe my "model" MAY be different than most (Ahh - but he says he is different). My objective may also be different than most - namely to determine "tradeable opportunities" in both directions. Those tradeable opportunities tend to be rather "volatile" at potential Market turns - and - tradeable in both directions.

While I believe this correction was a "fairly normal correction" in a bull Market - I am certainly not yet sure of it - so far. While I tend to be bullish (by nature optimistic) - I also have not yet seen the EXACT bottom - per my theory.

Thanks Parvis

I wasn't really commenting on your model but other than pointing ou that there is a relationship between rainfall forecasting techniques and the serial correlation techniques used by managed futures and other managers. I don't know any rainfall forecasting that uses your model but I'm very happy to be out right on that and no I agree I don't know your model and probably wouldn't really understand. It does sound a bit too 'technical' to me but all the very best with it and let me know if we can use it in rainfall forecasts!

cheers,

Paul

[Parvis]

how many chart bugs seen India buying 200 tons of gold ? None

how many chart bugs called the flash crash ? none

On the subject of "Flash Crashes":

1) What are Flash Crashes?

2) What is the Technical Significance of Flash Crashes?

3) How often do Flash Crashes occur?

4) Did we not have another Flash Crash only 4 Trading Days ago - slightly undercutting the previous per DJI (by 100 points)?

5) Why does a Flash Crash always appear to point at the general level of the eventual bottom?

6) How can you determine when this level is reached - it is actually the bottom?

1)may 6 09

2)i dunno, not a technician but I do know that the flash crash lows where revisited not long after.

3)they only need to occur once to render technical analysis useless

4)no, but did the techies call that one ?

5)a bottom for what ? that day or week ? until the next flash crash that the techies cant predict ?

6)I don't claim to know where a bottom is. Invest hedge fund style, bet big on medium to long term outcomes. It doesn't matter where the bottom is, as long as I have my mid to long term fundamentals right.

In Item 2 you say you are not an technician - in item 3 you claim to be a technician expert and say "a Flash Crash make Technical analysis useless".

Does that make logical sense?

It would appear that you do not understand what a "flash crash" is.

Edited June 1, 2010 by Parvis

[sokal]

how many chart bugs seen India buying 200 tons of gold ? None

how many chart bugs called the flash crash ? none

On the subject of "Flash Crashes":

1) What are Flash Crashes?

2) What is the Technical Significance of Flash Crashes?

3) How often do Flash Crashes occur?

4) Did we not have another Flash Crash only 4 Trading Days ago - slightly undercutting the previous per DJI (by 100 points)?

5) Why does a Flash Crash always appear to point at the general level of the eventual bottom?

6) How can you determine when this level is reached - it is actually the bottom?

1)may 6 09

2)i dunno, not a technician but I do know that the flash crash lows where revisited not long after.

3)they only need to occur once to render technical analysis useless

4)no, but did the techies call that one ?

5)a bottom for what ? that day or week ? until the next flash crash that the techies cant predict ?

6)I don't claim to know where a bottom is. Invest hedge fund style, bet big on medium to long term outcomes. It doesn't matter where the bottom is, as long as I have my mid to long term fundamentals right.

In Item 2 you say you are not an technician - in item 3 you claim to be a technician expert and say "a Flash Crash make Technical analysis useless".

Does that make logical sense?

It would appear that you do not understand what a "flash crash" is.

Maybe I don't know the tech talk definition of a flash crash. I am just saying that techies still seem to miss the big events. How many techies where saying to dump everything on May 5th ? I know the market recovered back to a lofty -370 on the DOW but still....

[Gambles]

Part 2 of 3 -

Dear all,

Please find below the latest update from MBMG International.

Last week we looked back with GMO’s Jeremy Grantham at the Great Depression and in particular the “Tragic year of 1932”. Global Markets Asia’s John Sheehan sees the period from H210 to H111 as both the tricky and the crucial year – a positive outcome is fraught with danger and yet whatever happens in that period will go a long way to define global economic direction for many years to come.

As Grantham says “if the economic recovery is slow and if unemployment drops slowly, then Bernanke will certainly keep rates very low, as he has promised in as clear a way as language permits. In that case, stocks and general speculation will very probably rise from levels that are already overpriced. And if they do, Bernanke will definitely not be concerned and has told us as much. There were some teasing comments from Bernanke at the lows last spring to the effect that the Fed might take the embedded risk of asset class bubbles more seriously, as many foreign central bankers have begun to and very sensibly so.

But that hope has now been utterly squashed, and Bernanke has returned to the original Greenspan line: let the bubbles look after themselves. Even if we were to re-enter bubble territory in a way that would be obvious to anyone who can tell the difference between 15 P/E and, say, 28 P/E (35 of us at last count), he still will do nothing. For he is now once again genuinely unconcerned with bubbles and even doubts their existence, as proven conclusively by his comments during this last one, the 100-year U.S. housing bubble, the breaking of which landed us in the rich and deep manure of 2009: “The U.S. housing market has never declined,” etc., etc. No believer in the existence of bubbles could ever say such things.

If we get lucky and have a strong, broad, and sustained economic recovery, interest rates will probably rise before we reach real bubble territory. As rates rise, the market will almost certainly settle down, and we will only have to deal with a substantially overpriced U.S. market and moderately overpriced global equities and risk premiums. In that world, the market would have to decline, but not disastrously, and would probably exercise no really damaging effect on the economy. If, however, the economy only limps along, which seems more likely to me, then we run a very real danger of a third dangerous bubble in stocks and in risk-taking in general. For in that event, Bernanke will definitely keep rates low quarter after quarter and speculation will surely respond. Again? Yes, I’m afraid so. In that environment, Bernanke will do nothing to let the air out gently. His lack of antibubble action is pretty much guaranteed. The end of such events is always hard to predict, but usually bubbles break for almost any reason when they are big enough. Of course, the larger the assets bubble, the bigger the shock to the economic and financial system.

Now, Greenspan was lucky enough to inherit Volcker’s good work, and that gave him a base from which he could launch or blow a huge equity bubble; he also had the advantage that the country’s balance sheet was in excellent shape. Even Bernanke inherited a reasonably solid position from which to fund a second bailout. But a third time? It is hard to work out where the resources would come from to resuscitate the economy if a real shock were to be delivered by another collapse of a major asset class. The key problems here are the Fed’s refusal to see the risks embedded in asset class bubbles and the willingness of both the Administration and Congress to tolerate this dangerous policy. Heck, they recently reappointed him! Yes, the Congressional natives were restless, but in waiting for a third crisis to kick him out, they may be too late to avoid the major-league suffering caused by his blind spot. Should unemployment linger at high levels, which I think is likely, and I get these things right better than half the time (I believe about 52%), then we had better hope that something lucky turns up to break the speculative spirit. This is perverse, but so is Bernanke.

What could go wrong, preferably in the next few months? Some combination of the following: an unexpected second leg down in house prices and a continued rise in the level of defaults, leading to a crisis at Fannie, etc.; a wash-out in commercial real estate and private equity caused by refunding problems (along the lines of Goldman’s and Morgan Stanley’s recent real estate fund wipe-outs) that result in a chain of major defaults in properties like Stuyvesant Town; a crisis in the euro where Portugal or Spain or Greece, or all three, default and strange things start to happen; a rapid rise in commodity prices, despite the anaemic growth of the developed world, which, with the same caveats, I also think is quite likely; competitive devaluations leading to a serious trade war; or my colleague Edward Chancellor’s favourite, two or three wheels falling off of the Chinese economy, which today acts as the main prop to global growth.

Okay, enough. We all know that there is plenty that could go wrong. Some combinations would be enough to break the market but still leave the economy limping along. This would be far better than having the market rise through the fall of next year by, say, another 30% to 40%, along with risk trades similarly flourishing and then all breaking. The possibilities of this happening seem nerve-wrackingly high. The developed world’s financial and economic structure, already none too impressive, would simply buckle at the knees.”

Enjoy your day!

Once again, very best regards,

MBMG International

Please Note: While every effort has been made to ensure that the information contained herein is correct, MBMG International cannot be held responsible for any errors that may occur. The views of the contributors may not necessarily reflect the house view of MBMG International. Views and opinions expressed herein may change with market conditions and should not be used in isolation.

[Parvis]

Maybe I don't know the tech talk definition of a flash crash. I am just saying that techies still seem to miss the big events. How many techies where saying to dump everything on May 5th ? I know the market recovered back to a lofty -370 on the DOW but still....

Socal

You are correct - to my knowledge - no chartist mentioned the coming of a "flash crash" and probably would not have been able to see it. However, any chartists who uses a chart similar to a link "Midas" provided (to justify his bearish sentiment) about 2 weeks before the crash would have known about the coming severe downturn starting the last week of April.

No chartist has necessarily an interest in telling you what they see and how they see it - unless their primary interest is to advise.

Edited June 1, 2010 by Parvis

[sokal]

I am seriously going to buy some BP shares tomorrow. This spill is way over-hyped, it is not even close to the worst in history. Opon further research, I have decided to wait because the stock is not below its March 9/2008 low. If it goes below that then Im in.

Good ol Saddam Hussain has the record, what a loss Saddam Hussain was to this world.

1. Kuwait - 1991 - 520 million gallons
   Iraqi forces opened the valves of several oil tankers in order to slow the invasion of American troops. The oil slick was four inches thick and covered 4000 square miles of ocean.
   
2. Mexico - 1980 - 100 million gallons
   An accident in an oil well caused an explosion which then caused the well to collapse. The well remained open, spilling 30,000 gallons a day into the ocean for a full year.
   
3. Trinidad and Tobago - 1979 - 90 million
   During a tropical storm off the coast of Trinidad and Tobago, a Greek oil tanker collided with another ship, and lost nearly its entire cargo.
   
4. Russia - 1994 - 84 million gallons
   A broken pipeline in Russia leaked for eight months before it was noticed and repaired.
   
5. Persian Gulf - 1983 - 80 million gallons
   A tanker collided with a drilling platform which, eventually, collapsed into the sea. The well continued to spill oil into the ocean for seven months before it was repaired.
   
6. South Africa - 1983 - 79 million gallons
   A tanker cought fire and was abandoned before sinking 25 miles off the coast of Saldanha Bay.
   
7. France - 1978 - 69 million gallons
   A tanker's rudder was broken in a severe storm, despite several ships responding to its distress call, the ship ran aground and broke in two. It's entire payload was dumped into the English Channel.
   
8. Angola - 1991 - more than 51 million gallons
   The tanker expolded, exact quantity of spill unknown
   
9. Italy - 1991 - 45 million gallons
   The tanker exploded and sank off the coast of Italy and continued leaking it's oil into the ocean for 12 years.
   
10. Odyssey Oil Spill - 1988 - 40 million gallons
    700 nautical miles off the cost of Nova Scotia.
    

Edited June 1, 2010 by sokal

[Gambles]

I have decided to wait because the stock is not below its March 9/2008 low. If it goes below that then Im in.

I see - what about the positions of the sun, moon & stars? Would they also impact the decision?

or maybe what colour socks you're wearing?

Generally, Sokal, except for your 'G' habit, you make a lot of sense but this time, my friend, I think you've lost it.......

[flying]

I am seriously going to buy some BP shares tomorrow. This spill is way over-hyped, it is not even close to the worst in history.

Yet...............

Good luck with your purchase, But I think it is premature to judge the potential of the underwater oil volcano.

[Parvis]

Midas your dead cat REALLY bounced – what did you do? "Stuff it with Hot air" ?

SPECIAL ANOUNCEMENT

Due to the accelerated ascent experienced by Midas proprietary "dead cat bounce" – the cat started decomposing rapidly and มีกลิ่นเหม็นมาก.

In simplified "Parvis speak" what goes up CAN come down - compliments of "Parvis cycle squiggies".

We therefore have decided to bring the cat back to earth with an equally accelerated descent to provide a proper "heroes burial" next to the "fumbling Bear".

Edited June 4, 2010 by Parvis

[midas]

Midas your dead cat REALLY bounced – what did you do? "Stuff it with Hot air" ?

SPECIAL ANOUNCEMENT

Due to the accelerated ascent experienced by Midas proprietary "dead cat bounce" – the cat started decomposing rapidly and มีกลิ่นเหม็นมาก.

In simplified "Parvis speak" what goes up CAN come down - compliments of "Parvis cycle squiggies".

We therefore have decided to bring the cat back to earth with an equally accelerated descent to provide a proper "heroes burial" next to the "fumbling Bear".

But this movement doesn’t prove at all that we are in a Bull market as you keep claiming ?

Yes of course certain participants in the market will drive it up even on fabricated statistics but that is about as meaningful as saying based on Enron’s figures it was a blue chip company

You still haven’t shown why or how this can be a Bull market and why any temporary uptrend will last very long ?

“ According to Charles Rotblut at AAII investors are focusing more on the return OF their capital than the return ON their capital:

“Individual investors placed a greater emphasis on return of capital last month because of the volatility in the stock markets. The movement of portfolio dollars out of equities and into bonds/bond funds and cash corresponds with the latest AAII Sentiment Survey, which showed bearish sentiment at 50.9%, the highest level of pessimism recorded since November 5, 2009. (Bearish sentiment is the expectation that stock prices will fall over the next six months.)”

[badge]

Midas - If memory serves me correctly, I dont think Parvis commited to[uS] markets being in 'Bull markets'? He merely suggested they might be, with some caveats.

In simplified "Parvis speak" what goes up CAN come down - compliments of "Parvis cycle squiggies".

We therefore have decided to bring the cat back to earth with an equally accelerated descent to provide a proper "heroes burial" next to the "fumbling Bear".

Parvis - I thought you were'nt offering any market 'calls' anymore as they tended to be less accurate when you told people about them beforehand? Well good on you, a bearish call

FWIW my focus is on the European Indices, but they havent met my models' resistance areas yet.

Good luck market participants.

[Parvis]

Yes Badge - I tend to stay away from suggesting EXACT market levels. I just wanted to bring a little more life in this discussion and perhaps I am a mosochist.

Correct - I tend to be a bullish - but not a "committed Bull" YET. I change with the"prevailing winds (short term sentiment)".

This down-movement should not amount to much - at least not much beyond the previous lows - but is tradeable. We may actually have an early up Friday. If I were to use "resistance levels" I would suggest we could have another 100+ DJI points up.

Edited June 4, 2010 by Parvis

[badge]

Yes Badge - I tend to stay away from suggesting EXACT market levels. I just wanted to bring a little more life in this discussion and perhaps I am a mosochist.

Correct - I tend to be a bullish - but not a "committed Bull" YET. I change with the"prevailing winds (short term sentiment)".

This down-movement should not amount to much - at least not much beyond the previous lows - but is tradeable. We may actually have an early up Friday. If I were to use "resistance levels" I would suggest we could have another 100+ DJI points up.

Well it was a monster down day in the end, and the DOW certainly didnt go up 100, but the general sentiment was right; nice one.

Personally my short orders for European indices missed the highs by 10 points/0.15%-0.3%, which is rather galling Other areas benefited though.

Hope you walked-the-walk and profited Parvis, and talk-the-talkers had a good talk.

[flying]

Well it was a monster down day in the end, and the DOW certainly didnt go up 100

You know watching that today the talking heads kept blaming the job report & the numbers.

How the fact was realized that private industry was not increasing jobs & that all the numbers were govt based jobs & fudged temp jobs at that.

But how could anyone not have know that already? Do they not have eye, ears ? I live here I see & I hear & there is no recovery in sight as far as jobs, housing, investment. There is awesome unemployment with extensions I cannot believe. I see folks getting 3 years of benefits now. That is pretty unheard of where 26 weeks was the max allowed before.

Who is paying?

[Parvis]

Yes Badge - I tend to stay away from suggesting EXACT market levels. I just wanted to bring a little more life in this discussion and perhaps I am a mosochist.

Correct - I tend to be a bullish - but not a "committed Bull" YET. I change with the"prevailing winds (short term sentiment)".

This down-movement should not amount to much - at least not much beyond the previous lows - but is tradeable. We may actually have an early up Friday. If I were to use "resistance levels" I would suggest we could have another 100+ DJI points up.

Well it was a monster down day in the end, and the DOW certainly didnt go up 100, but the general sentiment was right; nice one.

Personally my short orders for European indices missed the highs by 10 points/0.15%-0.3%, which is rather galling Other areas benefited though.

Hope you walked-the-walk and profited Parvis, and talk-the-talkers had a good talk.

Badge - My "dilemma" is always – if I had said on Wednesday after the close that we are going to have a substantial decline (which I knew) – you would have told me "wrong again DJI went up 100+ points on Thursday" (I actually use SPX).

Therefore I intentionally mentioned the decline on Thursday AFTER the close - fully realizing – the safest time to get in on the short side - was Thursday just BEFORE the close – and the best time to get out of a long position was Thursday at the beginning of the day.

There was "some" chance Friday could have opened higher initially based on the fact that exact resistance had not been reached. Resistance for DJI was at 10350 – 10400. It came close Thursday intraday at 10310. But I do not use resistance for timing purposes – simply too in-accurate.

Typically I can see trades like this 1-2 days ahead of time (sometimes more) - but the OPTIMUM EXECUTION timing (for a perfectionist like me) is always a SEPARATE ISSUE.

Now - watch what I said on 6-04 - but we are still about 2 days away - too long to be absolutely certain.

Edited June 5, 2010 by Parvis

[badge]

Thats lovely Parvis, but allow me to simplify for those of us who are pragmatic:

TV has graciously recieved from you 3 bad bull calls, and one good bear call(ignoring the fact you edited the post, said "we could have another 100+ DJI points up" etc).

Badge - My "dilemma" is always – if I had said on Wednesday after the close that we are going to have a substantial decline (which I knew) – you would have told me "wrong again DJI went up 100+ points on Thursday" (I actually use SPX).

Therefore I intentionally mentioned the decline on Thursday AFTER the close - fully realizing – the safest time to get in on the short side - was Thursday just BEFORE the close – and the best time to get out of a long position was Thursday at the beginning of the day.

Then why not simply state on Wednesday 'we are going to have a substantial decline, in 1 or 2 days'? It all seems very convaluted, again, Mr Parvis.

My model suggest stocks are clearly heading down for now(hence my wanting to short y'day) until y'days highs are breached, so my focus is on Support areas, which I find are usually extremely accurate(apart of course from y'day but then again is the equivilant of being 2 SPX handles out considered inaccurate? It is as far as P+L is concerned!)

Good luck