|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Brent.
Thanks for your comments. I don't doubt that there are cycles - there
must be many that have either a direct or indirect effect on the markets.
What I am skeptical about is their predictability as a market
forecasting tool. I think that from a psychological standpoint, things
like anniversaries (eg: October) are important factor, but not the only
one.
Cheers
Harold
----------
From: BrentinUtahsDixie[SMTP:brente@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, 15 April 1998 9:48
To: Harold Gibbs; RealTraders; Ernie P. Quigley
Subject: Re: Long Term Bull Market
Harold and RT's,
I tend to agree with your reasoning about the cycles. It seems that you
can pick any number and find some sort of cycle. However, when I take a
look at a monthly chart on the Dow going back to 1970 I notice a little
dip
or bump almost every October. Call it what you like but that suggests a
12
month cycle of sorts. If a yearly cycle using the same number or (144
months, 12X12) existed then this year would be the 2nd cycle because it's
the 24th year since the 1974 low. Is it significant? Beats me. Next year
will of course be the 70th anniversary of the 1929 crash.
I forecast that the market will hit 1,000,000 by the year 2010. Top that
somebody! Lastly, in the markets what goes up must come down. Always has.
Always...
Best Regards,
Brent
> For what it is worth, I think measuring 15, 30 or 61 year cycles is
> hogwash. You cannot verify statistically these so-called cycles
because
> the sample size is too small. Therefore they fall in the category of
> curve-fitting.
> However, I will add a caveat - if enough people believe in the
> conjunction of these cycles, they could precipitate a fall by causing a
> rush of money out of the market - but this would have nothing to do
with
> the validity of the cycles themselves!
> My bet is that we will see at least one large correction this year, and
> who knows it may be soon, but the bull market will pick up again.
> I await April 20 with bated breath....
> Harold
>
|