|
First, we wish to state for the record that there is no meaningful difference
in the intermediate and long-term market opinions held by the astute Mr. Prechter
and those held by this analyst. Secondly, we would like to note that we hold
the utmost respect for Mr. Prechter's talents, skills, contributions, and achievements
in both his publishing empire, and in his eloquent and brilliant sharing of
Elliott Wave Theory. Without Mr. Prechter, this analyst would not exist in
this venue.
Providing market analysis and forecasting guidance is a tough and unforgiving
business at times. In our best efforts to assist clients, we are at times misunderstood,
and sometimes nowhere near perfect in our future views and opinions of financial
markets. Duly criticized when blatantly wrong, we are after all "the experts" held
accountable to foresee major directional changes in market values.
Trust us; we are no strangers to tongue lashings by former subscribers and
critics alike. We take each criticism seriously, as we assume Mr. Prechter
does. In our view, it is the harshest and most astute of criticisms that challenge
us to hone our crafts ever finer in our quest to serve clients with the best
possible guidance.
In this context, we wish to share an inquiry sent by a potential subscriber.
The purpose in sharing the following exchange is not to discredit Mr. Prechter
but rather to share our responses in order to distinguish subtle differences
that may exist between our longer-term views on the unfolding Elliott wave
pattern reflected in the Dow Jones Industrial Average.
Our prospective client writes...
Dear Mr. Russo,
I was a subscriber of Bob Prechter in the past, so I think I know what I
am talking about when it comes to the magical view of Elliott waves and the
costly effects of poor timing and insistence upon maintaining outright wrong
interpretations for inordinately long periods of time.
COULD PLEASE EXPLAIN YOUR OWN LOGIC?
I do not care too much if you are wrong, (I would care however if, as
Bob, you are too wrong) but I do care A LOT about understanding how
you think. With such logic explained, you can become a different view,
with its own limits, and thus better enable my understanding and grasp
of the so-called "market" (or Voodoo Casino as it so often appears).
Best Regards,
A Potential Subscriber
Our response:
Dear potential subscriber,
We suspect the most brief and direct response to your inquiry surrounding
the logic and "why" behind our longer term wave count differentials from those
held by Mr. Prechter is the following:
1. We have taken a radically different perspective on the postulated Grand
Supercycle wave labeling at the price lows occurring in the 1857-1859 timeframe.
Our view that this bottom was that of a Grand Supercycle II wave is based on
the simple logic inherent in Elliott Wave sequencing, which suggests the parabolic
run-up to our present day 2007 high must undoubtedly be a "third wave".
2. Though it is plausible, we remain hesitant to interpret our recent 2007
peak as all-of the Grand Supercycle III wave, but are quite comfortable with
labeling it as that of a Supercycle III wave crest.
In sum, we avoid ALL fundamental and social types of arguments to justify
our wave counts. Instead, we maintain an extremely open and imaginative mindset
as to the near-infinite variation of impulsive and corrective paths price may
traverse across both an immense course of time, and amid the nine distinct
degrees of trend possible within the theory as outlined by Mr. Elliott himself.
In our view, (and we suspect you may agree) this approach is by far
the purest and least susceptible to any sort of voodoo magic.
Cordially,
Joe Russo
Publisher and Chief Market Analyst
Elliott Wave Technology
TRADE BETTER / INVEST SMARTER...

Potential subscribers follow up questions to our above response:
Then a practical question: How can I understand your logic more precisely
at a reasonable low cost within the next months? Could I receive one of your
old reports, perhaps the one you issued at around the low of March 2009 or
at the 2003 low?
The dynamic of your thoughts (what makes you change your mind?) is
very important for me.
Finally, taking out any analysis of the so-called "fundamental" is a good
idea with which I agree for medium term analysis.
However, taking out all social view - isn't that a little bit too much?
Graphical analysis is not enough in my view, there should be some kind of "confirmation" somewhere,
don't you think?
Our four-point response to the follow-up questions below:
-
What makes us change our mind is the price action relative to reasonably
plausible wave structures along with complimentary technical analytics
such as moving averages, cycles, and rate of change indicators.
-
We are all too aware that markets can behave irrationally for long periods
of time. Such diabolical market behavior has historically flown directly
against the most astute fundamental and social arguments. Fundamental and
social elements are continually present. Each can be argued both bullish
and bearish in virtual perpetuity, no matter the era. At the end of the
day, the price action itself determines the ultimate historical record.
-
Before jumping in headlong, you may wish to try our (IMF) Interim Monthly
Forecast subscription for $19.00.
-
We are in process of composing an article that archives realtime (NTO)
Near Term Outlook subscriber content from February 2, through the March
2009 low.
We hope that our initial and follow up responses have answered all of your
questions satisfactorily.
Trade
the Supercycle
IV-Wave
To safely speculate on, and effectively trade the endless array of unfolding
subdivisions forthcoming in SC-IV, one may subscribe to our premium technical
publication.
The express focus of Elliott Wave Technology's Near
Term Outlook is to help active traders anticipate price direction and
amplitude of broad market indices over the short, intermediate, and long-term.
Trade Better / Invest Smarter...
|