tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7179384084412903332.post513717157389166422..comments2023-07-14T07:39:33.346-07:00Comments on Gold Scents: ON THE BRINK OF AN ASSET EXPLOSIONToby Connorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07774977275885524428noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7179384084412903332.post-57774417187836615692010-03-16T13:02:10.982-07:002010-03-16T13:02:10.982-07:00Lot's of good work! Particularly on the SPX. W...Lot's of good work! Particularly on the SPX. While I am not so convinced about the "liquidity" argument, since 1.3 trln of it sits on deposit with the FED, it is the low rate levels that push investors into stoxx and performance breeds under-performance anxiety,so managers have to pile into it, rationale wouldn't matter at this point.<br />I still like to measure the market with the DJIA as a benchmark and historical tracing back more than 100 years (yep it works!)indicates that Dow 14,800 appears to be attainable this year, perhaps by around Labor Day. Also, a new high would suck in the last retail dollar and could set the stage for a very nasty thereafter. To that extent I am a bit more optimistic than what the superimposed SPX moves call for, on the upside. For that scenario to become valid, we should take out DJ 10,800 first.<br />As for post 14,800, it is my take, that it will be plain ugly. We should have gone there in 2007, but events took over and my research suggests, that the target "has" to be met, which means we are running quickly out of time. Hence the race to the top. Which also will accelerate the drop thereafter. How far down then? At least the old lows, but again research suggest that it might get much uglier. But if you are out on top, you will have ample time to assess the steps at the old lows.<br />As for Gold, L/T technical surveillance suggest that 1355 seems to be attainable. For the Euro I can see 1.48 max from here (exit <1.35, and then deflation hell should break loose.<br />So stay tuned.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7179384084412903332.post-58502337761594543362010-03-15T21:39:00.948-07:002010-03-15T21:39:00.948-07:00I definitely think the bull market in bonds is ove...I definitely think the bull market in bonds is over for the next 15 or 20 years. So rates should generally be rising over that period.Toby Connorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07774977275885524428noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7179384084412903332.post-70854265368632142132010-03-15T21:35:07.116-07:002010-03-15T21:35:07.116-07:00Toby,
Man you got me thinking tonight for sure. R...Toby,<br />Man you got me thinking tonight for sure. Really great analysis and charts, and thank you for them. <br /><br />It reminds me of Bennett Sedacca's (Minyanville) view from about a year ago where he laid out a scenario where we bottom in October 2010, at 300-400 on the S&P.<br /><br />Are your thoughts equally as dramatic on the interest rate side? I.E. should I lock in some cheap $$ while I can?<br /><br />Again, thanks and keep it coming.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02068400316820050270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7179384084412903332.post-72922934503321748322010-03-12T20:50:45.461-08:002010-03-12T20:50:45.461-08:00Lindsay,
I actually go over a lot of this stuff in...Lindsay,<br />I actually go over a lot of this stuff in the daily updates. But real quick.<br /><br />The dollar cycle is different from the stock market cycle. The longer term dollar cycle loast about 3 to 3 1/2 years. <br /><br />The stock market cycle lasts on average 4 years. At this time we have no indication the 4 year cycle in stocks will top in a left translated fashion (although I think it probably will as we are in a long term secular bear market).<br /><br />Basically we would need to see this yearly cycle (that just began in Feb.) top in a left translated fashion. I.e. within 6 months. If that happens then it would likely also mark the top of the 4 year cycle. <br /><br />From that point I would expect the global stock market to begin the next grueling decline into a lower low sometime in 2011 or 12.Toby Connorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07774977275885524428noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7179384084412903332.post-1389109454559019172010-03-12T20:42:06.938-08:002010-03-12T20:42:06.938-08:00A left translated cycle is a cycle that tops left ...A left translated cycle is a cycle that tops left of center. For instance, if the rally out of a 3 year cycle low were to top<br /> out in less than 18 months we would consider it left translated. Generally speaking the majority of cycles that top in <br />a left translated manner move below the prior cycle low.<br /><br />=============================<br /><br /><br />Friday<br />3.12.2010<br /><br />Toby,<br /><br />Hope this finds you well ... nice blog page, and<br />good charts, keep up the good work my friend.<br /><br />A couple of questions please, if I may as follows :<br /><br />Ok ... assuming this is true, and I do believe that it is, then how can we not know for absolute certain at this point in<br />time that this "top" which is forming now (in mid March of 2010), is "not" within the first half of a much longer term<br />left translated cycle ? In other words, how do we not know that this three to four year cycle which has begun as bullish<br />as it obviously has, is not the bullish beginning of a longer term left translated cycle ? After all, in such a case, wouldn't<br />it be true, that cycles are "scalable" and therefore, a left translated four year cycle might have begun (I've never heard of<br />a three year cycle such as you mention) in March of 2009, so thus far we've only so far seen twelve months of it, hmm ?<br />Such a new four year cycle would begin as this one has "very bullishly", and yet "could" still end up being very bearish in<br />the entire four years, or even six, eight, or ten, all of which are only some of the cycle lengths that we do know exist, eh ?<br /><br />ALSO ... how do not know for certain, that what appears to be the beginning of the next cycle with the February 5th. low,<br />is "perhaps" not "an extension" of the previous year long cycle beyond the "exact" time frame of one year ? After all, a low<br />formed on February 5th. 2010, is not exactly one year from the March low of 2009, it was "short" about one month, thus it<br />would seem still within the realm of possibility, that we "could" yet head down into a low of eleven or twelve months from<br />the year + - cycle which obviously began in March 2009, hmmm ? The "year cycle" does not have to be exactly one year, eh ?Lindsay Holthttp://www.lindsayholtstudio.comnoreply@blogger.com