1. Gary Post author

    Well it looks like our friend spotted almost the exact bottom in oil yesterday.

    I’m amazed at how this often works. When the bears finally become confident enough to challenge me here on my own blog it is almost invariably a sign of the bottom. So when you start seeing posts like we had yesterday it means it’s time to start buying.

    That being said I would wait till stocks make their next DCL as there will probably be a retest of the bottom.

    1. Jacob

      The bears are everywhere giving there reasons oil will go lower. I’ve never traded oil but I probably should here. I honestly think something terrible happens at the Olympics, bad enough for the war drums start beating really hard, oil surges. Sad but true

  2. Gary Post author

    What traders like Gent don’t realize is that once a bottom is ready to be put in big money will often force price lower one more time to sucker in traders like him. They sell or short and it allows the big players to enter their positions leaving the little guys, pattern traders, chart monkeys holding the bag.

    I’ve seen it a hundred times, and I think we saw it again yesterday.

    1. Steffmeister

      ATH in my Gold&Silver portfolio yesterday 🙂 I am way ahead of schedule, my “plan of freedom”

      Sold some producers and bought a couple of explorers instead. I am glad to see that Kootenay Silver finally got some air under her wings

      Pensionfunds moving into common stock, a smart person told me today that we will not experience a crash like 1929 bcos the dollar will not be the same (inflated/devalued) as it was back in the days.

      Rising charts yes but if you look at the devaluation, the picture of common stock is not that pretty …

  3. eddy1974

    Indus India Index : somebody have an opinion?
    It’s possible that is forming a new DCL and it have the same potential of Nasdaq?

  4. Steffmeister

    India got the best demographics in the world with a growing middle class. Analysts over here is predicting an explosive growth in India for the next 2-3 decades.

  5. zkotpen


    Good to see you back mate. Not sure about anything from your last post, as that’s outside the scope of my own work. But I will add caution about use of the word “knowledge”. What you’re referring to are ancient beliefs, which are generally not “forgotten”, but rather obliterated by scientific discovery, followed by the establishment of scientific paradigm.

    In my chemistry analogy, for instance, Lavoisier breached the medieval or ancient wall of belief that there were 4 elements: Earth, air, water, and fire. But he only breached the wall of belief — he didn’t replace it with a scientific paradigm. That left a void, until Mendeleyev completed the overthrow of ancient and medieval belief with his periodic chart, from which the paradigm of modern chemistry was born, allowing us all the benefits of modern chemistry we enjoy in the modern world today. I need a raincoat that is lightweight, and 100% impermeable. Thanks to the Lavoisier/Mendeleyev combo, I can have one in about 15 minutes! If we were stuck in ancient beliefs, I’d get soaked — and maybe catch my death of cold — in the rain.

    Only 1 scientist I’m aware of completely obliterated or nuked ancient beliefs in one fell swoop: Newton, and that was because he invented the math (Calculus), as well as establishing the paradigms of physics and optics that most humans take for granted today. Newton lifted the entire human race out of the food chain with his calculus. The industrial revolution is impossible without calculus.

    In market forecasting, Elliott breached the wall of pre-scientific belief, but he did not provide enough to establish a paradigm — he didn’t have the tools to do so in his time. Elliott’s “guidelines” are admittedly empirical — NOT scientific. Any math used therein is limited to algebra.

    Thus, we have the current state of affairs: pre-scientific forecasters spending about as much time jousting with each other as they spend on actual analysis. But once the wall of pre-scientific belief is breached, that breach is a fatal blow, and it’s only a matter of time until the paradigm is established. Once the paradigm is established, consensus will snowball, slowly at first, and then faster as more people join in the new belief system, and begin to use it successfully in their work.

    And to give you a hint, as is the case in ALL modern science, algebra is not sufficient to accomplish that task. Neither is an army of MBA’s mining data for their “quants” to crunch. Neither the MBA nor the “quant” uses scientific method — they are not scientists. MBA’s grumble whenever they need to pay a scientist — it increases their expenses, messes up their cost structure, and reduces their “efficiencies” and “productivity”, as calculated by their accountants. Want to drive your controller ballistic? Just add a scientist — a non-revenue-producing worker — to the payroll. Your accountant may stage a mutiny — and I’m not exaggerating!

    Conversely, the scientist is probably not the most pragmatic person in town — they are probably most effective (and happy) quietly doing their research in some isolated place, testing their hypothesis, challenging it, figuring out how to get by in the day-to-day world as best they can, trying not to talk to too many people who will probably think they’re a weirdo, which, of course, is fairly accurate. And they are hungry — hungry to produce results, about which they are passionate — that’s the drive that motivates them — a far, far cry from the driving force behind the MBA’s, the “quants”, and the accountants.

    Anybody who is not hungry, is, by default, content with the status quo, and will defend it to the death, jousting with detractors. After all, their angle on the pre-scientific status quo is what puts food on their tables, pays their lodging, and pays for all their toys. In market analysis, even the folks at EWI & Avi & so forth are constantly jousting for their side, just as “EW” detractors oppose them in those jousts.

    Above you mention the 1929 crash. Don’t you think I’ve already tested that against my hypothesis? There’s no way they could have seen that coming without the aid of computers. But using a long term SMA, I begin to see certain divergences forming as early as 1927-28 time frame. Same divergences that appear in Sep, 2011, gold, by the way, on the same degree of chart.

    Why Sweden?

    I’m an Economist — that’s where the big prize in Economic Sciences is awarded 😉

    1. zkotpen

      Good point Don.

      After posting, I went out and dyed my hair blond, so things are much clearer:

      Market forecasting is not a science at present, but it will be, and many people will benefit from that.

  6. Diller55

    Hi Zkotpen,

    I don’t think it will be as science is based on nature, and market forecasting is based on trying to predict people – different ball game isn’t it:)

  7. Steffmeister


    Hi there, I am not a scientist, I am a software engineering and used to abstract things. Oh yes it’s all about math, mother natures own math figured out by Mr Fibonacci.

    Here is the answer for Gold shown in this spiral youtube.


    I can not tell you the answer straight away, if it gets widely known the golden spiral fractal might break 🙂 and that is my edge against other traders.

    Once you have figured out the fractal nature of charts you do not need a system, I am not there yet. Then it is possible to make accurate predictions of markets years before it actually happens. I’ve seen many proofs of it.

  8. Steffmeister

    Oh sorry I forgot, Good Luck with getting the Nobel prize, but if you do not start with the Fibonacci math I think your chances is pretty slim to make accurate predictions. See the chart is two dimensional price and time. Once you figure out the geometrical “signature” of an asset I think you will make some mind-boggling discoveries.


Comments are closed.