search elliott


  • Google
Share/Bookmark

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

FlagCounter

  • Where From?
    free counters
Related Posts with Thumbnails

« Slow Roll, so 1938 Yet Again | Main | China Bubble Update: Free Week! »

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

min

"Rod" Prechter?

Is he Bob Prechter's vaseline toting pimp or something?

twitter.com/mkt_ronin

Great chart of the aftermath of 1929 that we might be repeating.


What is confusing is that Glenn Neely, who was stated he would bet his career that March 2009 was not the low of this bear mkt, is now leaning towards a massive triangle to last out towards 2014.

Maybe Summers called any bearish commentators and put the arm on them as they are out of other methods. Prechter has not caved, but Neely's change makes no sense. Sheesh, at least let it start down and see how it is happening. It's not like he has had a hot hand lately!

twitter.com/mkt_ronin

>>Note - in Neowave moves are rarely counted as beginning and ending at the actual price high/low, however in practical terms this count says that the bottom is in for good after all.<<

The problem is that Neely was insistent that the low in March 2009 could not be the low. Now, the count he is giving strong consideration to says that is the low for 50+ years.

Nothing took place in the last week that should make anyone go from sending out his dire warnings to subscribers of the end of the world to "the lows are in'. Couple this with his call for the top that was a disaster, one has to wonder what he is doing (and of what use is it?) that he is charting out 4-5 years when he can't get the next week right!

The guy lost all credibility with my by making this sudden change with no meaningful change in wave structure.

twitter.com/mkt_ronin

>>Note - in Neowave moves are rarely counted as beginning and ending at the actual price high/low, however in practical terms this count says that the bottom is in for good after all.<<

The problem is that Neely was insistent that the low in March 2009 could not be the low. Now, the count he is giving strong consideration to says that is the low for 50+ years.

Nothing took place in the last week that should make anyone go from sending out his dire warnings to subscribers of the end of the world to "the lows are in'. Couple this with his call for the top that was a disaster, one has to wonder what he is doing (and of what use is it?) that he is charting out 4-5 years when he can't get the next week right!

The guy lost all credibility with my by making this sudden change with no meaningful change in wave structure.

DG

Mike,

He hasn't committed to the wave structure he warned about yesterday. I think it is more of a way of saying that could be happening and we shouldn't ignore the possibility. I agree with you that there was no real significant change in wave structure, so I'm a bit puzzled by the need to make any announcement at all, honestly.

min

Like I said:

Think 1970s style markets on steroids and you'll have a good enough road map to keep you profitable for quite some time.

I've never followed Neely so I don't know for sure, But there are a lot of other things besides wave structure he is looking at to consider the triangle possibility, I know this hit me back in June.

Prechter not "caving" is business as usual. He also didn't cave from 2003 to 2007 on equity markets, pm, real estate etc. so if you are looking for technicians to aid your trading and you don't have a 100 year horizon who would you prefer?


twitter.com/mkt_ronin

DG wrote:
>>He hasn't committed to the wave structure he warned about yesterday. I think it is more of a way of saying that could be happening and we shouldn't ignore the possibility.<<

If someone says they are so positive that the March low cannot be the low, and keeps preparing people to get short for a drop of biblical proportions and essentially anarchy during a market that he expects to ride down, and that they stake their reputaion on, and then change, IMO, nothing said in the future means anything and his predictions are now worth little. I know EW well enough that I can make money with it myself. My guess is that a lot of subscribers wrote "WTF?" to him as he was telling subscribers that the top needed exactly what were doing. Now, NEELY is doing exactly what he accused others of doing...being emotional.

>>I agree with you that there was no real significant change in wave structure, so I'm a bit puzzled by the need to make any announcement at all, honestly.<<

As am I. I saw his calls for below 500 by the end of 2008 and then the call of below 500 by the end of 2009. Perhaps we need to be on our guard to load the boat as his compitulation of what he would bet his career on is what is needed for his original thought to be right.


Mike

DG

Now, NEELY is doing exactly what he accused others of doing...being emotional.

Maybe. I can't get inside the guy's head. I think he may be worried that the market will turn out to have put in a low and wants to get "ahead of the curve" in calling it. The main problem with that thinking is that every mainstream financial pundit has already said "the bottom is in". Like I said, I don't see any real upside from the announcement, but I see similar downsides to what you are saying.

He did say this is only an "option" and he has not adopted this as his official outlook. So, on the one hand, he should be applauded for being up front with his readers and subscribers, while on the other it does obviously undercut all of his prior forecasts indicating much more downside to come. Either he should have been less certain earlier or he should have kept this new scenario to himself until it became the only real option.

Also, he should have bounced his proposed count off of someone who knows NeoWave well enough to give him feedback. There are two significant flaws in his proposed view that I saw right away. Now, NeoWave rules are one thing and market action is another, but if the market action always follows the NeoWave rules, that proposed outcome is probably impossible.

The comments to this entry are closed.