Re: [CANSLIM] Ernie's Forecasts

From: "Norman" <theboyd@tisd.net>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Ernie's Forecasts
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 16:14:13 -0500
Previous Article (by Author): Re: [CANSLIM] Ernie's Forecasts "Norman"
Top of Thread: RE: [CANSLIM] Ernie's Forecasts "Kelly Short"
Next in Thread: RE: [CANSLIM] Ernie's Forecasts "David Taggart"
Articles sorted by: [Date] [Author] [Subject]
Hi Maui Mike,

OK, on topic and out of the shadows<G>  The investors.com chart shows a low
of 911.06.  I know that sometimes there are trades that confound the
charting sites, so where can I get the same info you have?

As for encoding Fib lines in DNA; that's a little far fetched even for this
Trekker to consider<G>  My ecology understanding dictates that genes survive
by increasing the reproductive success of the species.  Now I can think
"outside of the box" as good as the next scientist, but this one doesn't
seem to be in the same room with the box<g>  Looks like an observation has
been made, now you have postulated a theory, who's gonna test it<G>

Elliot wave theory is 'nother story and one that I don't have enuf knowledge
to address at this time.

There, now *that's* OT!

Norm
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Gibbons" <mikegibbons@proactech.com>
To: <canslim@lists.xmission.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 4:01 PM
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Ernie's Forecasts


> Norm and kelly,
>
> I don't want to be picky, but the S&P 500 sank to below 905 at about
10:00.
> It then rose and fell again with a turn later in the day at 911. So the
turn
> was actually lower than Ernie predicted.
>
> That said, I do agree that Ernie's forecasts since I've been following
them
> have certainly been on the money and within what I would consider
> "experimental error".
>
> However, I have the same kind of feeling about Elliot Wave Theory as
> Einstein had about the uncertainty principal - without a rational
> explanation for why it works (if it does reliably), its hard to believe in
> it.
>
> I can understand fibonacci numbers recurring frequently in nature because
> they could be somehow encoded in DNA, but I have a hard time seeing how
they
> could apply to the stock market. But then again, I haven't put any time
into
> trying to understand the causal connection and my comments are based
largely
> on ignorance. If any member of the group can explain a possible causal
> relationship, I would find that helpful.
>
> Also, why is this off topic? Understanding M is fundamental to CANSLIM
> because 75% of stocks go with the flow.
>
> Aloha,
>
> Mike Gibbons
> Proactive Technologies, LLC
> http://www.proactech.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com
> [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Kelly Short
> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 10:36 AM
> To: canslim@lists.xmission.com
> Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Ernie's Forecasts
>
>
> Norm,
>
> I was commenting at lunch at perfectly he called it today and yesterday.
> Almost to the hour. I wonder if he tracks the success of his predictions.
>
> Kelly
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Norman [mailto:theboyd@tisd.net]
> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 3:27 PM
> To: canslim@lists.xmission.com
> Subject: [CANSLIM] Ernie's Forecasts
>
>
> All,
>
> I know it's a little (OK a lot<G>) off topic, but is interesting.  For
those
> of you who subscribed to Ernie's S&P 500 forecasts, did you notice he has
> apparently called this one perfectly.  He predicted a turn window or
> 910-913.  Today it turned at 911.06.  For now, his crystal ball is
working.
> For those of you who are not subscribed I copied last nights forecast
below.
>
> Norm
>
>
> Once again today could be the bottom, as we came within a whisker of the
> 910-913 target range, and both of my short term cycle indicators are
> suggesting that a turn is imminent. While the next target level of 876-884
> is still a possibility, at this point I would have to say that it is not
> very likely that we will go that low.
>
>
>
> The 910-913 range has emerged as the high probability target for the
> termination of this short term down move. The most likely scenario for
> tomorrow would be a move slightly lower into the target range or just
below
> before the market terminates the move, and begins to go higher. The second
> most likely scenario is that the market will open higher and continue to
> move higher from there. And the third most likely scenario would be a
> continuation of the down move possibly as low as 900, with an intra-day
> reversal featuring a closing price above at least 911. Each of these
> scenarios involves the 910-913 target range.
>
>
>
> Despite the high probability that we are about to make a turn and not
likely
> to go much lower, until we see the turn confirmation signal this market
> could still reach the lower target range
>
>
>
> E
>
>
>
> -
> -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
> -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
> -"unsubscribe canslim".  Do not use quotes in your email.
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
> For your protection, this e-mail message has been scanned for viruses.
> Visit us at http://www.neoris.com/
>
> -
> -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
> -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
> -"unsubscribe canslim".  Do not use quotes in your email.
>
>
> -
> -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
> -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
> -"unsubscribe canslim".  Do not use quotes in your email.
>
>


- -
- -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
- -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
- -"unsubscribe canslim".  Do not use quotes in your email.
Go to Jeff Salisbury LWGate Home Page.