mr.marcus said:...not total pants tim...maybe thongesque....remember tim if convention was correct every weak hand would be a strong hand and as this is zero sum it just isnt possible,seems rather hard to keep these interesting threads on track at the moment....so im thinking of some sunday group skype sessions as alternatives.
think of the move in terms of fuel/energy tim....draw one out....at the intital mark up/down stage...the break.....how can energy be optimised....take a inverse head and shoulders as the basis of say the accumulation pattern and consider what is occurring in every leg....this will serve to understand the initial break phase and first leg out of the accumulation period....and please consider the h and s for yourself....do not again take the conventional wisdom....of a head and shoulders....its scary wrong....zero logic....cheers mark j
ps....if there's enough interest maybe its time for a another thread....and to laptop/cj it hasn't been done all before....a very stupid attitude and an excuse for not thinking and being lazy....if everyone had that approach there would never be progress in medicine .technology or any of the sciences...if people wanted another thread what would they want...thats not to say they'll get it ..how about why all price and volume vendors are wrong :cheesy:...or seriously maybe the anatomy of a head and shoulders...well a left hand shoulder would done correctly would be enough.
Another thread sounds great - I vote for starting with the left hand shoulder - very interested in hearing your views and what other experienced members have to say
BTW - Thanks for all of your contributions! - truly eye opening and thought provoking info to a newbie like myself
regards
linesniffer said:
How does a stock get it's initial price on entry into the market?
What happens to this price if nobody buys or sells the stock?
Once the price moves, is the price ever fundamental again?
One more thing...
Did you sell yesterday? :cheesy:
update on miners and bank sectors of ftse....trouble is bigger trouble when it comes togther at a particular point ..in this case both sectors hitting range high zones....see earlier context chart for mining to see high zones.
Attachments
Last edited:
“The inferior reasoning of crowds is based, just as is reasoning of a high order, on the association of ideas, but between the ideas associated by crowds there are only apparent bonds of analogy or succession. The mode of reasoning of crowds resembles that of the Esquimax who, knowing from experience that ice, a transparent body, melts in the mouth, concludes that glass, also a transparent body, should also melt in the mouth; or that of the savage who imagines that by eating the heart of a courageous foe he acquires his bravery; or of the workman who, having been exploited by one employer of labour, immediately concludes that all employers exploit their men.
The characteristics of the reasoning of crowds are the association of dissimilar things possessing a merely apparent connection between each other, and the immediate generalisation of particular cases. It is arguments of this kind that are always presented to crowds by those who know how to manage them. They are the only arguments by which crowds are to be influenced. A chain of logical argument is totally incomprehensible to crowds, and for this reason it is permissible to say that they do not reason or that they reason falsely and are not to be influenced by reasoning. Astonishment is felt at times on reading certain speeches at their weakness, and yet they had an enormous influence on the crowds which listened to them, but it is forgotten that they were intended to persuade collectivities and not be read by philosophers. An orator in intimate communication with a crowd can evoke images by which it will be seduced. If he is successful his object has been attained, and twenty volumes of harangues – always the outcome of reflection – are not worth the few phrases which appealed to the brains it was required to convince.”
The characteristics of the reasoning of crowds are the association of dissimilar things possessing a merely apparent connection between each other, and the immediate generalisation of particular cases. It is arguments of this kind that are always presented to crowds by those who know how to manage them. They are the only arguments by which crowds are to be influenced. A chain of logical argument is totally incomprehensible to crowds, and for this reason it is permissible to say that they do not reason or that they reason falsely and are not to be influenced by reasoning. Astonishment is felt at times on reading certain speeches at their weakness, and yet they had an enormous influence on the crowds which listened to them, but it is forgotten that they were intended to persuade collectivities and not be read by philosophers. An orator in intimate communication with a crowd can evoke images by which it will be seduced. If he is successful his object has been attained, and twenty volumes of harangues – always the outcome of reflection – are not worth the few phrases which appealed to the brains it was required to convince.”
mejnoon2003
Newbie
- Messages
- 2
- Likes
- 0
mejnoon2003
The market watched by millions, acts as one
linesniffer said:
The market watched by millions, acts as one
Is there any correlation between currencies and markets and global economics?
Surely these millions of ordinary folk are not in the driving seat of oil prices, currencies etc?
Act as one it may, but on who's terms?
Joe public?
Governments?
The institutions?
Surely these millions of ordinary folk are not in the driving seat of oil prices, currencies etc?
Act as one it may, but on who's terms?
Joe public?
Governments?
The institutions?
Darkpools:?:
Hi.
Price patterns are formed through the structure of buying and selling, they actually NEVER fail. How a person percieves them may fail.
Patterns can draw you away from what is important.
Price forms patterns, and not the other way around.
Only support and resistance exists really, that's the way i see it, i may be wrong.
Thanks.
Key Levels?
S&P 500, the Dow, etc, have key levels. 1500 for the S&P is one key level, 13000 for the Dow.
There are always key levels for indices.
These indices are supposed to reflect the group as a whole, yeh.
So...
Why does an indices that is supposed to reflect the multiple stocks within it, seem to obey TA, just as well as a single stock?
I think it is a complete load of bollux.
Can you give me a serious answer, that is water tight and without holes?
Thanking you!
S&P 500, the Dow, etc, have key levels. 1500 for the S&P is one key level, 13000 for the Dow.
There are always key levels for indices.
These indices are supposed to reflect the group as a whole, yeh.
So...
Why does an indices that is supposed to reflect the multiple stocks within it, seem to obey TA, just as well as a single stock?
I think it is a complete load of bollux.
Can you give me a serious answer, that is water tight and without holes?
Thanking you!
OK.
Let's say 3 companies from three different sectors of the, S&P.
One is in a bullish channel, the second is in a range near it's tops, the other has just made a double bottom.
What's the average pattern of these three?
The average price is easy.
% move average is easy, also.
Is the average pattern a 'head and shoulders'?
That's just 3 stocks, not 500.
Intended structured buying and selling? What can be structured when there is 500 stocks in the pot?
Totally random?
Let's say 3 companies from three different sectors of the, S&P.
One is in a bullish channel, the second is in a range near it's tops, the other has just made a double bottom.
What's the average pattern of these three?
The average price is easy.
% move average is easy, also.
Is the average pattern a 'head and shoulders'?
That's just 3 stocks, not 500.
Intended structured buying and selling? What can be structured when there is 500 stocks in the pot?
Totally random?
Similar threads
