combined with the rumor that qe tapering what would happen
【在 B*******n 的大作中提到】 : Since Fed started the printing press, Hindenburg Omen had stopped working. : It makes me wonder what is the motive of the media to mention it now. : hehe
t*n
7 楼
看到了吗?今年究竟有没有?
【在 f****g 的大作中提到】 : 哦,没看到,让俺去看看。
B*n
8 楼
too much sideline money buying the dip, Wall Street is NOT happy. I start to believe allence's claim, 2013 must be very bullish, just like 1995.
【在 N****L 的大作中提到】 : combined with the rumor that qe tapering : what would happen
N*L
9 楼
it is bullish just wondering how deep this dip can be what do you think?
【在 B*******n 的大作中提到】 : too much sideline money buying the dip, Wall Street is NOT happy. : I start to believe allence's claim, 2013 must be very bullish, just like : 1995.
B*n
10 楼
目测1580,硬币没找到。
【在 N****L 的大作中提到】 : it is bullish : just wondering how deep this dip can be : what do you think?
r*e
11 楼
how good is this indicator? I don't think it's very reliable.
B*n
12 楼
I just said, it stopped working long time ago after Fed started QE. From 2009 to now, Omen had happened several times; every time it was a bear-trap.
【在 r***e 的大作中提到】 : how good is this indicator? I don't think it's very reliable.
N*L
13 楼
it is said to be pretty good for predicting 5% dips, which from now looks pretty likely. and a lot bears will be trapped. only a few times did panic sellouts happen.
trap.
【在 B*******n 的大作中提到】 : I just said, it stopped working long time ago after Fed started QE. From : 2009 to now, Omen had happened several times; every time it was a bear-trap.
B*n
14 楼
That's why I predict 1580.
【在 N****L 的大作中提到】 : it is said to be pretty good for predicting 5% dips, which from now looks : pretty likely. and a lot bears will be trapped. only a few times did panic : sellouts happen. : : trap.
N*L
15 楼
exactly big wet niubility!
【在 B*******n 的大作中提到】 : That's why I predict 1580.
m*9
16 楼
这个应该比较靠谱~ 1550±100
B*r
17 楼
A 5% drop only gives us 1600. If I have to bet, it may just break 1600 intraday only.
【在 B*******n 的大作中提到】 : That's why I predict 1580.
r*e
18 楼
the reason why I'm not sure is because we don't have any data to prove when we have this indicator, the market will decline. And the market decline, we have this indicators. And even in this article, it says new version is 2.5% of the total listing, old version is 2.8%. This time is 2.2%. But the argument is valid. The market is too volatile. The problem is still there: when? When the volatile is high we feel something will happen, but when? tmr?next week? next month? +/-2days is good enough.