Share prices - tsk!

james6848

Member
Messages
90
Likes
0
Hi - I originally put this is in the technical analysis forum, but it is probably far too much of a newbie question.
Anyway, I was just wondering how, if supply and demand is in action, can a share price rise over the day even with a much greater amount of sellers than buyers, eg.:
SCF.gif
 
You can't say trades are 'buys' or 'sells'.
Some trades are delayed by an hour to several days.
AT trades are often marked incorrectly.
And for example I have been able to buy shares lower than the mid price, it was then listed as a sell!
 
Thanks Racer.
So, to clarify - you can't (unless you a mover and shaker) know what the percentages of buys and sells were on a particular day. That's what you're saying, right?

Therefore, the only indication of whether there were more sellers than buyers remains the price change.

One thing is confusing me, then. Volume is espoused as a great indicator of breakout points etc., but how can this be true if volume changes sometimes relate to previous days?

Sorry, I must have my thick head on today...
 
Quote "the only indication of whether there were more sellers than buyers remains the price change."
Being pedantic, 'more sellers' should say 'more shares sold' and vice versa for buyers. The number of people buying or selling is irrelevant.

As a newbie perhaps you are thinking that all you have to do is get hold of some data and the rest is easy.
Not the case.
Data is there to be manipulated, hidden, delayed etc in order to ensure that you do not know what is happening.
Why do you think that delayed trades, for example, are allowed ?
The volume you see is not necessarily the volume that is happening at that time, in particular in relation to large scale trades.
The big players do not want their competition knowing what they are up to and so they are legally allowed to hide their activity in these ways.
In any event, you do not need need to use volume at all if you know what you are doing.
I use it occasionally as a kind of secondary prop and that's all. Others will disagree and swear by it.
If it was ever means to be a useful piece of information it would come with pretty buy and sell labels so everyone could see what was happening - lol.
It is useful sometimes as an indication of the current level of participation in the market - High or Low being enough imho. However as mentioned above is it not reliable by any means.
"If you want to fool the suckers, fool the tape."
Welcome to the world of manipulation, smoke and mirrors that is anything to do with money.

Glenn
 
One thing is confusing me, then. Volume is espoused as a great indicator of breakout points etc., but how can this be true if volume changes sometimes relate to previous days?
I use vol to give me an idea, but no indicator is 100% reliable, as Glenn says..
Welcome to the world of manipulation, smoke and mirrors that is anything to do with money.
This is so true!
I use support/resistance and trend lines and find them the more reliable type of indicators.. but even then you can get false breaks of those too.
 
Thanks for clearing that up. Don't worry, I'm not relying on any one indicator, just trying to get 'beyond the charts'...
 
Looks like the two 75,000 deals at 179 were the bogus ones. One is marked M ie market maker to market maker.
 
It's hard not to be a bit naive when seemingly comprehensive books (O'Neil et al) fail to mention that volume etc. is subject to blatant manipulation. I wonder why they don't...
 
james6848 said:
It's hard not to be a bit naive when seemingly comprehensive books (O'Neil et al) fail to mention that volume etc. is subject to blatant manipulation. I wonder why they don't...


This is when you start down the road of conspiracy theories - as well you might.
'Comprehensive' is not a recommendation in itself. Perhaps a better word is Padding in some cases.
And why do people write books ? To make money of course.

Glenn
 
Some things on my mind at the moment:
1.That maxim: 'Those who trade, trade; those who can't, teach', well - is that really true for someone like William O'Neil? I'm not saying I believe it is or isn't the case, it's just an interesting point for discussion.
2.For someone like him I'd bet trading IS easy - what with his contacts and army of minions.
3.I've been wondering if his popularity has been affected by the rise of the 'Candlestick' brigade. I notice he doesn't use them in his books.
 
volume etc. is subject to blatant manipulation.
It is all subject to that..
Economic figures latest ones will be revised at the next release.. up or down..
Previous may have failed to meet 'expectations', but the revised the next time will or could have exceeded but they will be ignored because the next new release is not meeting or exceeding the latest expectations..
Earnings.. meet 'expectations'.. whose.. and who revises them down?
The company, analysts.. but they don't agree either.. a consensus..an agree to disagree.
Buy or sell recommendations.. you will get both for the same share and wildly different price targets.
Oh and price targets.. that is another mad idea!
 
Top