You'll Never Figure out what I'm doing with this
-g-
Message 16664693
To:orkrious who wrote (5959)
From: Zeev Hed Thursday, Nov 15, 2001 4:38 PM
View Replies (2) | Respond to of 13039
Cross currents are quite heavy, and thus I am not ready to change the outlook, some parameters are now pointing to the current period not resolving itself as fast as I thought, but taking once more a period of four months (like the May 22/Sep 22), thus getting a low (a major low near the 1400, and possibly worse). I don't like that model that much, since it will almost repeat this year model (a low was predicted then for the early part of March, if you remember). I am not coming to this model until I see how we resolve the top here. We are already almost a week late on the timing schedule (the top was supposed to be at the latest on 11/9, but as you know, we made a new recovery high yesterday) for the original scenario, and compressed too much to finish the job by December 21st (we did not finish the job last year either (g).). If a new scenario comes into play, than the low in December will be probably around 1625 (nominal 1628), with a small bounce later this month from 1782 (nominal 1793) (a two legs decline to the 14th and a final third leg to the 21st, after a minor bounce around the 14th). Then a sharp rally (year end rally and "January effect" combined) to form a double top at the 1920/40 area again and a very weak February, early March to once more, the low 1400 (1458 nominal, 1425 max target right now, that target could change to a new low under some circumstances). That the best I can do right now. By the way, this is the "alternative model", if we do not start and get down here early next week and accelerate the movement down early in December. Since the last "alternative model" worked perfectly (coalescence of the late August and October lows in September), maybe it will this time as well.
Zeev
Message 16783891
To:orkrious who wrote (12822)
From: Zeev Hed Wednesday, Dec 12, 2001 10:00 PM
View Replies (5) | Respond to of 13040
Jay, about a 300 naz drop from the top (we already did almost 100 of those intraday by the low today) would be the "minimal" requirement by the end of December to keep the original scenario intact, that would be to the 1765 level, since I think that 1793 is a strong support area, I would even "accept" a slightly milder decline. To make the turnips "completely happy" and keep the "to da moon" scenario for next year, I really need 1650 or so on the retenchment, but when was the last time I got what wanted? Scenario II will come into effect only if we do not get within shouting distance of 1793 before the end of the month.
Zeev
Message 16783859
To:Zeev Hed who wrote (12818)
From: orkrious Wednesday, Dec 12, 2001 9:55 PM
View Replies (1) | Respond to of 13041
I still expect the first half of next year to be relatively bullish (after, of course, we pay the piper with a retrenchment of one kind or another).
Zeev, I assume you are now thinking scenario II is in play since it is almost unfathomable that we are going to drop 500 points in two weeks. Consequently, how can the first half of next year be bullish when we should be retesting (at least) lows by April?
Also, if you have a minute and missed these?
Message 16781704
Message 16782227
TIA
ork
To:orkrious who wrote (12824)
From: mishedlo Wednesday, Dec 12, 2001 10:08 PM
Respond to of 13041
Ask and Yee shall Receive.
S&P & Naz
cftc.gov
Gold & Silver
cftc.gov
M |
