Jump to content

Mr. Widget Makes the Call


Recommended Posts

So back to my original question of this evening, if we break Friday's low in the next X number of days, does that mean that we have "by definition" entered your C wave down sub-cycle? The red line on your chart would seem to indicate that to me. Would that be consistent with your EWave interpretation?

Not by definition, but I'd feel more comfortable that the downmove was a wave of higher degree. Of course there's also no guarantee my count is right.

 

In terms of a short entry, I wouldn't necessarily wait until 1020 was broken, but it depends on your timeframe. A daily swing high at or below 1080, combined with a downturn in some of the daily indicators, should be a lower risk spot for a swing short. (I'd wanna see those slow stos turn back down, looks like they're getting ready to get frisky for a few days.)

 

As far as "end times" indicators, that's another kettle of fish. Not sure if appearance in pop culture could be one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 23
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Confusione de Confusionses – Professional Edition

by Lee Adler, Tuesday, October 6, 2009, in Professional Edition, Today's Markets | Permalink |Comments (0) Edit The move of the past two days is marked by a myriad of conflicting and confusing signals. The uptrend, while unbroken, appears to be weakening as the market averages test an area of heavy resistance. Click here to download complete report in pdf format (Professional Edition Subscribers). Try the Professional Edition risk free for thirty days. If, within that time, you don’t find the information useful, I will give you a full refund. It’s that simple. Click here for more information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NYSE EURONEXT - THE CO-LOCATION BLUES

 

The next logical step to co-location is to co-locate all the matching engines together.

 

The NYSE offer to do this is a step in the right direction - but will fail as there is no direct financial incentive for the other engines to come in with them.

 

How to provide the right incentives to attract other matching engines?

 

Answer - provided free of cost.

 

They should put the data centre into a seperate company and offer equity in that company to any other exchange that will co-locate their matching engine with them.

 

Actualy they could have a corporation with variable ownership shares where the company is owned at any one time in direct proportion the the volume/revenue that each matching engine generates - sort of like a partnerhip where each partners are remunerated at different levels according to the business they bring in.

 

Co-locating the engines also cuts down on all the massive cost of duplicating all the hardware and software at each exchange for the HFTA's as well - so they will like it - im sure they are getting frustrated with the fragmentation of the markets - all the costs and complications of their networks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

cwd, thanks for your reply re my previous question. I got the point that was not immediately obvious to me re GDP/rate of return, regardless of all the fine points of any data definitions and rate of change for various forms of debt.

Which made me think of terminal velocity versus surface absorption issues and how that might apply to a host of investment items. Contrary to assumptions: terminal velocity is that point where the thing stops falling, versus ending its rise.

 

I read the intra-day tonight and the idea that "quantries" up-flate their currencies via Dr. S's post. I presume many do that without true documentation to avoid ugly facts. Amen to that. That's the huge 30 year bingo parler of exciting ideas like laddering up into fraud ipo's involving the i-net, slicing and dicing "new and novel" debtor obligations for everyone, the idea of paying anyone more than $1 million, let alone $100,000, to show up for work.

 

When the housing market was going up, I suppose many people thought "hurrah." No I can borrow against my credit line, my house, my salary, etc. "I'm rich." So I will leverage myself and make a bunch of money. Few people thought at the time: my dollar is so crappy that what was once a $40,000 house, 40 years ago is now a $500,000 house. Few realized that the costs to insure and pay taxes on that property rose and were a huge tax. Neighbors ran around and felt rich. Lets put in a pool or patio. Apparently no worries about how to pay for those things except for a thrifty few.

 

There were many siren calls: its the internet; its the global economy; its emerging markets where billions of chinese will become wonderful responsible consumers, among others. All ideas of get rich quick schemes.

 

Now, it's interest rates at near zero and the siren call of doing something risky to earn more, which many will respond to, witness bond activity.

 

We live on a finite planet, living presently on a largess of easy money (or government subsided money), whether by government guarantees or infusions.

 

Given that, a huge amount of money will either disappear (does not fit into any government plan) or we are all Zimbabwee. At .01 percent where would it go when college tuition costs are supposed to rise 31 or more percent in two years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NYSE EURONEXT - THE CO-LOCATION BLUES

 

The next logical step to co-location is to co-locate all the matching engines together.

 

The NYSE offer to do this is a step in the right direction - but will fail as there is no direct financial incentive for the other engines to come in with them.

 

How to provide the right incentives to attract other matching engines?

 

Answer - provided free of cost.

 

They should put the data centre into a seperate company and offer equity in that company to any other exchange that will co-locate their matching engine with them.

 

Actualy they could have a corporation with variable ownership shares where the company is owned at any one time in direct proportion the the volume/revenue that each matching engine generates - sort of like a partnerhip where each partners are remunerated at different levels according to the business they bring in.

 

Co-locating the engines also cuts down on all the massive cost of duplicating all the hardware and software at each exchange for the HFTA's as well - so they will like it - im sure they are getting frustrated with the fragmentation of the markets - all the costs and complications of their networks.

Co-location for the "I'm faster than you" market makers, and arbitragers is an arms race.

 

It doesn't matter what the cost is, the competition eventually erodes the marginal edge down to zero, after costs.

 

The whole HFT co-location millisecond crowd had better get rich quick .. because every day, their edge gets thinner.

 

Ask a dual listing arbitrager how they're doing these days...

 

Ask a NYSE specialist...

 

Ask a human ETO market maker...

 

Ain't competition a b*tch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Stool Pigeons Wire Message Board? Tell a friend!
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • ×
    • Create New...