Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (12111)	12/25/2001 11:37:42 PM
From: Moominoid	Respond to of 74559

I guess my main point is that the US is not yet ready for the Great Depression replay, though that in that way won't happen again, or even the Japan replay, or even a 1970s US replay. On the other hand I won't be surprised if major non-NASDAQ US stock indices end up 50% below peak levels by the time this is all over which may be another year or so's time. Just reading in the Australian today forecasts for the FTSE100 index one year from now. The reporter noted that no forecaster predicted it would be lower one year from now. I'd take a contrarian view there. But don't be surprised if the Dow is at 40000 in 2010 which is strangely 65 years from 1945. Take a look at this monthly chart of the NASDAQ Composite: siliconinvestor.com Note how the stochastics have crossed over and that in the last 20+ years that event has been followed by an ongoing rally for at least a year or so. We could see an immediate failure of that momentum which would be unprecedented in this sample, though admittedly it is very small statistically speaking. More likely to me is a rally where those stochastics will eventually reach the 80+ level. This may be just a massive bear-market rally (wave B of 4) as I see 1987-90 being or the beginning of the new bull leg (wave 5 that I mentioned in my last post). My favored scenario is the former. Is that clear enough? :) Or have I tangled things in more uneccessary technicalities? David