It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The "up-to-the-minute Market Data" thread

page: 427
189
<< 424  425  426    428  429  430 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by RetinoidReceptor
[

Not bad. You better be careful with your stock market voodoo though or you may be burnt at the common equity (supposed to be a joke for 'burnt at the stake' err...nevermind)

When it happened that the dividends were re-installed as a parameter in the fancy algorithms? We have to be in a great shape when the 19th century incentive to buy stock is moving the market from 1 pm to 4 pm.




posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by RetinoidReceptor
 


its selling calls and buying puts = shorting a stock that you cant short



posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by stander
 


See the only thing this wouldnt work on is a "W" day or a "U" day.. I think this method would work the best when we open BELOW fair value .. just an opinion but havent seen enough evidence of course either way



posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by GreenBicMan
 

It could work as a template for the usual pattern where the traders get their lunch money in the morning. The formula is SIMILAR = IDENTICAL + DIFFERENT.

Here is the similarity between yesterday and today.





The identical part is the max point before the lunch and two min points linked with a positive slope. Yesterday, the close matched the max point, but not today. Why? Where is the difference?

The difference is between those two time points that I have mentioned: 11 am and 1 pm. Yesterday, the slope between them was positive but today, it was negative. That means the adjustment to the end of the regression line made out of the two bottom points had to be done accordingly. If the 11am/1pm slope is positive, you add 1% of the index value to the projected end point, and if the 11am/1pm slope is negative, you add only 0.5%.

So the simple rule is up for the test, but I don't think that tomorrow the condition will repeat again. My guess is that the index will be flat like a tire with no distinct max and min points where both min points had to have a positive slope.



posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by stander
 


hmm...

I still think this actually has more to do with Pivot Points - but in your scenarios as well you could

=and(if(time = x *early time*,mkt last price < market open), if(time=x*later time*,mkt last price > last market price *11am*)

then buy

of course you would have to program this with a program like sierra or something, and I would do this if I didnt have so many other programs on the line + 1 slow computer.. i think you are on the right path though



posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by GreenBicMan
of course you would have to program this with a program like sierra or something, and I would do this if I didnt have so many other programs on the line + 1 slow computer.. i think you are on the right path though


GBM why don't you daytrade or something to increase your funds and then go on to the futures stuff that you like so much?



posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 05:31 PM
link   
reply to post by RetinoidReceptor
 


I need a bankroll lol - I refuse to trade "scared" like I used to when I would have like 50% of my bankroll on the line with one trade..

I need 100,000 to start anything again IMO and would like to do it right.. everything else is just practice for now.. and IMO that is prob. the cheapest lesson I could learn (and I get a lesson thrown at me everyday at some point it seems when I SIM in a regular day trading environment)

But as far as my programs go I want to just straight start a HF with those and I need about 7.5 years more of back testing before I will start touting anything to investors/firms - all the intraday tick data is $$$$ and they just dont hand that out to burnouts hahahaha



posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 05:33 PM
link   
So GBM natural gas storage was estimated to increase by 74bcf as an average made by 8 analysts. That is so bad. If it is below that when the EIA reports Thursday at 10:30AM I will buy call contracts on UNG like crazy. On average the week of July 24th over 5yrs NG increased by 51 billion cubic feet so that just demonstrates how unorganized and scatter brained these natural gas producers are. They are like the farmers during the Great Depression...



posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by RetinoidReceptor
 


where did u get those stats?

2nd



posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by GreenBicMan
reply to post by RetinoidReceptor
 


where did u get those stats?

2nd


Here you go, towards the end:

www.bloomberg.com...



posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by RetinoidReceptor
 


23 BCF to overshoot is a pretty interesting stat, I'm not sure where you found this, or if the info is legit, but I would keep that to yourself lol unless its just sitting out there....

after looking at the chart again, it is really still "garbled" but i like if it breaks through *the now resistance* of 14 and took a play after that..

It used 14 as support for quite a while then on the last little run it hit its resistance there as well.. something to think about.. but if you feel you have a play.. then you have a play and it sounds like you have done your homework



posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by GreenBicMan
reply to post by RetinoidReceptor
 


23 BCF to overshoot is a pretty interesting stat, I'm not sure where you found this, or if the info is legit, but I would keep that to yourself lol unless its just sitting out there....

after looking at the chart again, it is really still "garbled" but i like if it breaks through *the now resistance* of 14 and took a play after that..

It used 14 as support for quite a while then on the last little run it hit its resistance there as well.. something to think about.. but if you feel you have a play.. then you have a play and it sounds like you have done your homework


It isn't esoteric knowledge, it is posted right on bloomberg (that is where the link leads to).

[edit on 28-7-2009 by RetinoidReceptor]



posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 05:55 PM
link   
ok, i read that..

i still dont know..

could be intentional disinformation (coming from that energy guy) but the analysts estimates come in around what this guy is saying..

natgas has been beat up and no one likes large inventories.. at the same time its tested its low IMO too many times to break..

I dont know man.. its a toss up.. I might still wait till it gets over the hump of 14 for a quick run and thats prob it...

that whole energy thing scares me especially when now the rumors are really flying about the CFTC calling for position limits...



posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by GreenBicMan
ok, i read that..

i still dont know..

could be intentional disinformation (coming from that energy guy) but the analysts estimates come in around what this guy is saying..

natgas has been beat up and no one likes large inventories.. at the same time its tested its low IMO too many times to break..

I dont know man.. its a toss up.. I might still wait till it gets over the hump of 14 for a quick run and thats prob it...

that whole energy thing scares me especially when now the rumors are really flying about the CFTC calling for position limits...



If the inventories are bullish (probably under 70) I will buy the contracts...this is the median estimate,74. So some came higher and some lower. This will purely be a daytrade. Natural gas really gets affected by inventory reports as oil used to (now it barely phases it).

I know what you mean though. Especially with these ETF's. The gov. may begin shutting these commodity etf's down because once there is a huge amount of ownership of their shares, they begin buying up the contracts till no end and instead of FOLLOWING the price, they can begin to DETERMINE the price. I personally agree with position limits unless you will for sure order on the contract or you are delivering/receiving a commodity. If you are just speculating then there should be a position limit imo...

[edit on 28-7-2009 by RetinoidReceptor]



posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 06:01 PM
link   
take a look at that chart on stockcharts.. save the chart

take a straight line from the 2 recent big tops..

that almost intersects with the 3rd little top at 14..

draw a horizontal line at 14

that acts a S & R for this stock..

key to this stock (ETF) is breaking 14..

I would play that ..

If you think you have it right though, step on it, but only you can make that call



posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by RetinoidReceptor
 


yes its a crowded trade

spec's bring liquidty but this ETF I heard the same as well where its making the price not following lol..

im not sure whats really going on so i prob. shouldnt even speculate honestly.. im sure there is only a handful that are in the know on this bird



posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 06:06 PM
link   
by the way

we only have a 20 pt spread in the sp 500 now between the 50 and 200 ema (DAILY)

and a 210 pt spread give or take in the DJIA


Next run up is coming soon my friends - get in where you fit in



lol



posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by GreenBicMan
yes its a crowded trade

spec's bring liquidty but this ETF I heard the same as well where its making the price not following lol..

im not sure whats really going on so i prob. shouldnt even speculate honestly.. im sure there is only a handful that are in the know on this bird


Speculators do more damage than good to the average person. Oil would have NEVER gone to 147 dollars/barrel last year without them. I don't care what anyone says. And UNG doesn't always follow natural gas because they are now being limited on how many contracts they can hold, their fees and roll over costs, options on the stocks and shorting. Something else has to give to these commodity stocks because really the ETF's getting too big is a problem, especially with futures contracts that control SO much of the underlying security/commodity especially when it doesn't serve any purpose except speculation...



posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 09:23 PM
link   
This is a big ole thread -- over 400 pages now. Doesn't somebody agree with me that it should be locked and second one should be started?

Just my 4* cents.


*Adjusted for the coming hyperinflation.



posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 11:51 PM
link   
reply to post by RetinoidReceptor
 


Maybe not, I dont know the answer to the price, but historically things have gotten way out of line before (put any commodity in this area)

A world without liquidity wouldn't be a great trade because the prices can jump significatnly in a thin market if there is a large trade.

Be careful what you wish for is all i am saying



new topics

top topics



 
189
<< 424  425  426    428  429  430 >>

log in

join