Is there someone on this forum that do believe in this product or in Richard Swanell? If you do, I would appreciate your feedback as well. If you have less than 30 posts on this forum - please don't bother.
I have been following the forums here but not posting.
You need to make your own judgement on whether or not to support Mr Swannell. However, I think it's always best to approach anything in life with a fair amount of skepticism.
Consider that the justice system is not perfect. Sometimes innocent people are unfairly accused and prosecuted. On the other side of that coin, sometimes criminals plea at a lower charge to avoid a drawn-out trial. But, chances are, if you are in the criminal system, there's a pretty good chance that you deserve to be there.
I will add some thoughts about Elliott Wave's in general.
In order for Elliott Waves to work, there must an underlying natural law to govern it. I understand why Fibonacci's occur in flowers, shells, rabbits, and bees. I don't understand why it would appear in the stock market.
Since Ralph Elliott introduced the concept in the 1930s the market has changed dramatically. No more "open cry" trading pits, decimal vs 1/8th increments, black-box automated trading, dark pools, complex derivatives, leveraged and inverse ETFs, etc. - all of these change the nature of the markets.
What I have seen is that Elliot Wave Practitioners are remarkable at showing historical charts and explaining how the patterns are clear. However, where they fall short is in predicting the future.
You can spend thousands of dollars for software and services to show you these patterns. One of the most famous people in this area is Robert Prechter. He's probably the preeminent expert on the Elliott Waves. But, you should check his record. CXOAdvisory.com tracks "gurus."
Prechter has a 23% accuracy.
That is the worst of all the gurus on the list. But, that doesn't seem to effect the commitment of his followers - who border of fanatical. They explain "the prediction was just too early." (I can argue that almost any prediction will come true, given enough time.)
These facts that don't stop the fervent hordes from defending the principals and attacking those who question them. It's almost like a religion.
Now with that said, I believe that you can look at a chart and say things like:
- "that looks like a normal pull back"
- "that looks like a normal rise to a level of resistance"
- "if it breaks support here, it will probably fall to there."
Those rational levels of support and resistance do tend to correlate with Fibonacci numbers. So, there's probably something there. I just don't believe that it's a science. (Honestly, I think it's closer to astrology.)
Living in Chicago, I meet lots of professional traders - specialist, market markers, prop desk traders, etc. I always ask if they use Fibs. I usually get the same answer - something like: "I don't use them, but I know some people do. So, I look at them for potential reversals."
Another huge gap in EW theory is that that there is no consideration for volatility - historical or implied. This is because the capability to measure and calculate these things did not exist in the 1930s.
Now, this is just my opinion and I am sure there are others who disagree. You need to make the decision yourself.
"If it seems too good to be true, it probably is."
"Seek those who seek the truth; run from those who have found it."
"If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck."
Eric
