Click image for original size
If it is not going to spend too much time on correction, the next level up is around 1.5370.
Click image for original size
MA
MarcinO
Rep: 67
Posts: 5,506
The Pound is just below a huge area at 1.5260.
If it is not going to spend too much time on correction, the next level up is around 1.5370.
If it is not going to spend too much time on correction, the next level up is around 1.5370.
JI
jimkane
Rep: 3,058
Posts: 33,089
'They' better pick this up here right now because it is set up for swooooosh leg down right at this moment...
JI
jimkane
Rep: 3,058
Posts: 33,089
I'm not saying I necessarily want them to pick it up, I'm like talking out loud to the bull machines, warning them of the danger.
JI
jimkane
Rep: 3,058
Posts: 33,089
And, as expected, there's the start of the swoosh. Maybe this is a bullish ABCD in here and they come, but I could see that previous level wasn't going to hold, and it didn't. I suspect it's headed for a deeper retest, or new lows for the move. But 'they' surely have to know the danger if they don't come in.
RA
rat89
Rep: 0
Posts: 7,015
Click image for original size
Click image for original size
Click image for original size
Click image for original size
Click image for original size
Click image for original size
JI
jimkane
Rep: 3,058
Posts: 33,089
Okay, I don't know how many Armstrong followers there are in here (from what I've heard, most of you are), but here's my take on something he is saying. Generally I think he is the only one out there with a clue, but some of the things he says I take as him missing something so obvious I shake my head and wonder what his skill level really is. But, I am sure, it will work out exactly as he says, and this will reassure everyone he is the man. Still, it reminds me of the trader who breaks his rules wildly and gets a monster winner and reinforces that behavior with the success.
Okay, first read this, from this link http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/40574 :
"As we have warned, higher interest rates are NOT BEARISH but BULLISH for the market. Anyone who dares to peek under the rug at history for past performance will see U.S. stocks rally with higher rates. A simple correlation ALWAYS reveals rates rise with bull markets and decline in bear markets. It is just nuts the way these people talk up these events. So the Federal Reserve announced it is raising its key policy rate for the first time in nearly a decade in a vote of CONFIDENCE in the economy. For decades, the talking heads have indoctrinated a negative view on rate hikes in the vast majority and have brainwashed everyone, including the press."
So, this is more support for his idea that the market will double or more from here. But, this is the first time in the Fed's over 100 year history that they have not raised during the entire 'bull' market (no less stayed at zero), and it is one of the very longest running 'bulls' in history. Then, right as just about every metric available says the 'bull' is done, the Fed starts to raise. So, although I pretty much never believe in the old 'It's different this time', this is the very definition of 'It's different this time', for the simple reason this has, indeed, never happened before, the fed not raising for an entire long-running 'bull', and as recession looms, and all metrics say a bear is imminent, they raise.
And, did they raise because of economic confidence, as Armstrong suggests? Hell, no. They did it because they know a recession is imminent, and they need 'ammo' for when it hits.* (I think that's an idiotic approach, a trying to get something for nothing deal, because everything they do now will not be 'absorbed', it will hasten the recession, and then reversing that will 'recover' the growth? What kind of logic is that? It's purely a CYA approach, so they can claim they've done everything they can.) But, the recession is likely to hit soon, so at best they get one more hike off (which I even doubt), and then they have to lower. So, when they lower again, will Armstrong be saying bear, like he suggests above?
And speaking of that, rates have been zero for how long now? Yet the market went insane 'bull' with no rate raises at all, all this time? Why wasn't Armstrong yelling bear all that time? I thought dropping or super-low non-rising rates mean bear, rising rates mean bull? Isn't that what he just said? If higher rates are bullish for a market, aren't the lowest rates possible, zero (forgetting for right now the totally insane 'negative rates' concept), bearish for the market? Yet the market has done nothing but rise for coming up on 7 years straight. Wait, aren't low rates bearish? The market is never wrong. Hence, you can't correlate rates with bullish or bearish. I guess I'm not a good enough mathematician to understand his genius. No, wait, my mathematical skills are... never mind.
Look, I am a big fan of Armstrong, maybe even one of his very biggest fans. But a few things he says make not only no sense, they speak to him missing something obvious. I wish I could grasp what the story is on those things. But, likely when the meltdown starts soon enough money will flow into U.S. stocks like crazy, we will double or more, and he'll say 'See, I told you so, you morons and idiots'.
In all this, too, I'd like to say it's all 'academic', in that the Fed will surely 'reverse' in my opinion, there will be no tightening cycle coming. This will be interesting, though, because what will they do when the economy falls apart bad, and the stock market is in the process of more than doubling, the Dow heading for 43,000? They should hike like crazy to 'cool off' the stock market (Armstrong expects this), but that will destroy the imploding economy. Talk about boxed in, but this is what I call the highest probability scenario coming up. I don't know what the trigger will be, but the choices are many, from war, to terrorist attack, to the meltdown of any number of highly leveraged entities, etc.
So, my conclusion is that if I read the above post, without knowing who said it, I'd say they are taking an oversimplified approach (something Armstrong constantly warns about), and missing many obvious things that are a part of the story. My overall rating? Clueless pundit. But, this is the great Armstrong, my hero...
* I think the Fed is hiking, too, because of the impending (and unstoppable now) pension fund crisis, something that has been held off for now by rising bond and stock prices. Instead of meeting obligations from interest earned they are meeting them by raising contribution levels, and from cap gains. The money market is also close to completely falling apart (negative rates will render it obsolete, yet the entire planet depends on it, and its deep liquidity). This is a primary concern for them, but they can't mention, or even hint about it, so it goes quietly unobserved by most. Armstrong has mentioned all this many times, even saying that is why they are hiking. Now he said it's a vote of confidence in the economy? What???
Okay, first read this, from this link http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/40574 :
"As we have warned, higher interest rates are NOT BEARISH but BULLISH for the market. Anyone who dares to peek under the rug at history for past performance will see U.S. stocks rally with higher rates. A simple correlation ALWAYS reveals rates rise with bull markets and decline in bear markets. It is just nuts the way these people talk up these events. So the Federal Reserve announced it is raising its key policy rate for the first time in nearly a decade in a vote of CONFIDENCE in the economy. For decades, the talking heads have indoctrinated a negative view on rate hikes in the vast majority and have brainwashed everyone, including the press."
So, this is more support for his idea that the market will double or more from here. But, this is the first time in the Fed's over 100 year history that they have not raised during the entire 'bull' market (no less stayed at zero), and it is one of the very longest running 'bulls' in history. Then, right as just about every metric available says the 'bull' is done, the Fed starts to raise. So, although I pretty much never believe in the old 'It's different this time', this is the very definition of 'It's different this time', for the simple reason this has, indeed, never happened before, the fed not raising for an entire long-running 'bull', and as recession looms, and all metrics say a bear is imminent, they raise.
And, did they raise because of economic confidence, as Armstrong suggests? Hell, no. They did it because they know a recession is imminent, and they need 'ammo' for when it hits.* (I think that's an idiotic approach, a trying to get something for nothing deal, because everything they do now will not be 'absorbed', it will hasten the recession, and then reversing that will 'recover' the growth? What kind of logic is that? It's purely a CYA approach, so they can claim they've done everything they can.) But, the recession is likely to hit soon, so at best they get one more hike off (which I even doubt), and then they have to lower. So, when they lower again, will Armstrong be saying bear, like he suggests above?
And speaking of that, rates have been zero for how long now? Yet the market went insane 'bull' with no rate raises at all, all this time? Why wasn't Armstrong yelling bear all that time? I thought dropping or super-low non-rising rates mean bear, rising rates mean bull? Isn't that what he just said? If higher rates are bullish for a market, aren't the lowest rates possible, zero (forgetting for right now the totally insane 'negative rates' concept), bearish for the market? Yet the market has done nothing but rise for coming up on 7 years straight. Wait, aren't low rates bearish? The market is never wrong. Hence, you can't correlate rates with bullish or bearish. I guess I'm not a good enough mathematician to understand his genius. No, wait, my mathematical skills are... never mind.
Look, I am a big fan of Armstrong, maybe even one of his very biggest fans. But a few things he says make not only no sense, they speak to him missing something obvious. I wish I could grasp what the story is on those things. But, likely when the meltdown starts soon enough money will flow into U.S. stocks like crazy, we will double or more, and he'll say 'See, I told you so, you morons and idiots'.
In all this, too, I'd like to say it's all 'academic', in that the Fed will surely 'reverse' in my opinion, there will be no tightening cycle coming. This will be interesting, though, because what will they do when the economy falls apart bad, and the stock market is in the process of more than doubling, the Dow heading for 43,000? They should hike like crazy to 'cool off' the stock market (Armstrong expects this), but that will destroy the imploding economy. Talk about boxed in, but this is what I call the highest probability scenario coming up. I don't know what the trigger will be, but the choices are many, from war, to terrorist attack, to the meltdown of any number of highly leveraged entities, etc.
So, my conclusion is that if I read the above post, without knowing who said it, I'd say they are taking an oversimplified approach (something Armstrong constantly warns about), and missing many obvious things that are a part of the story. My overall rating? Clueless pundit. But, this is the great Armstrong, my hero...
* I think the Fed is hiking, too, because of the impending (and unstoppable now) pension fund crisis, something that has been held off for now by rising bond and stock prices. Instead of meeting obligations from interest earned they are meeting them by raising contribution levels, and from cap gains. The money market is also close to completely falling apart (negative rates will render it obsolete, yet the entire planet depends on it, and its deep liquidity). This is a primary concern for them, but they can't mention, or even hint about it, so it goes quietly unobserved by most. Armstrong has mentioned all this many times, even saying that is why they are hiking. Now he said it's a vote of confidence in the economy? What???
JI
jimkane
Rep: 3,058
Posts: 33,089
Somehow a nice post I wrote up here just vaporized and bounced me to a different post in edit mode. I've never seen anything like it before.
Anyway, there's the deep retest on the ES, and the inverted H&S as we have seen time and time again, and it 'sees' it. This is where it would pop if that's what they intend, as they have so many time before. That's what I am watching for, but I'm not so bullish as this layout would imply from past behavior.
Anyway, there's the deep retest on the ES, and the inverted H&S as we have seen time and time again, and it 'sees' it. This is where it would pop if that's what they intend, as they have so many time before. That's what I am watching for, but I'm not so bullish as this layout would imply from past behavior.
JI
jimkane
Rep: 3,058
Posts: 33,089
So, sub-200 next? Too bad they can't get that 1800's Op-Ex pin area...
Originally posted by rat89
I forgot one
Click image for original size
JI
jimkane
Rep: 3,058
Posts: 33,089
It usually pays for me to follow my gut read on things...
Originally posted by jimkane
I want to short it (soooooooooo badly), and will be looking for the slightest weakness to consider pouncing, but with the attitude of not marrying the position, and being ready to turn on a dime. Otherwise, it's ride until this thing breaks, and keep leaning on the long side until proven 'wrong'.
Originally posted by jimkane
I just want to short it right here sooooooo badly...