|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Why wouldn't you care? For example, some people on the RT site went
long Beans last week. Oversold or some wave count was the reason. But
S.America was in the middle of a bumper harvest -- and U.S. plantings
were expected(and did) to exceed last year. I read the Ag reports, an
was, of course, already short on the last rally (%R timed the entry). I
just don't know why people think supply/demand in a finite commodity
world doesn't matter. It's like buying a car on looks without looking
at the mechanical condition. It is easier to play with 100 different
indicators, and most seem to work in retrospect. But if the
odds(system) are that you should not get hit by a car if you cross the
road, because you have sensors telling you that a car is too far away to
hit you, you may benifit by actually looking before you cross. I am
what Larry Williams calls a "contextual trader". I use basic
fundamentals and COT data to see what is happenning in the market, as
the market exists for commercials(producers and food companies). Larry
Williams, who is a rennowned trader besides writting books, and who
knows just a little about TA, says that TA is alot of hogwash if its not
put into context. Would you buy a stock that has terrible earnings now
and is expected to have terrible earnings in the future because of a
chart formation?
I am not trying to preach, and I do of course have losing trades. But I
can not imagine trading something that I have no earthly idea about the
conditions. For most casino games, there are no real "conditions" that
affect anything. But this is commodities, we need these things to
sustain life on earth and to enjoy a modern lifestyle. There is a
finite supply of these things. If, for example, there are Beans
aplenty, no Elliot Wave formation will make Archer Daniels Midland pay
$7 a bushel.
I would like to start a thread on the pros and cons of using obvious
fundamental influences for overall direction, and TA to time entries and
exits.
Tim Proeber
tproeber@xxxxxxxxxx
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Earl Adamy [SMTP:eadamy@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, April 06, 1998 5:33 PM
> To: Proeber, Tim
> Subject: Re: FUTR: Sugar
>
> Don't know, don't care.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Proeber, Tim <TProeber@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: 'eadamy@xxxxxxxxxx' <eadamy@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Monday, April 06, 1998 3:18 PM
> Subject: RE: FUTR: Sugar
>
>
> >What are the fundamentals?
> >
> >tproeber@xxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Earl Adamy [SMTP:eadamy@xxxxxxxxxx]
> >> Sent: Sunday, April 05, 1998 11:11 AM
> >> To: RealTraders Discussion Group
> >> Subject: Re: FUTR: Sugar
> >>
> >> I believe it's likely that sugar has put in lows but has not yet
> based
> >> enough to
> >> move agressively higher. Chart suggests that probabilities are on
> long
> >> side once
> >> the pivot low at 9.70 is tested. A failure to hold 9.70 and then
> take
> >> out the
> >> previous pivot high at 10.20 would change my mind. See attached gif
> >> for play by
> >> play details.
> >>
> >> Earl
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Arnold Thompson <arnoldt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> To: Alan Sears <asears@xxxxxxxx>
> >> Cc: RealTraders Discussion Group <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Date: Thursday, April 02, 1998 7:41 PM
> >> Subject: Re: FUTR: Sugar
> >>
> >>
> >> >Well Sugar retreated today to a level that stopped me out at 9.89.
> I
> >> am
> >> >now uncertain. A 3 wave rise is evident. The retracement was too
> >> deep
> >> >for me to see this last wave as impulsive. Any opinions???????
> >> > << File: SUGAR.gif >>
|