In fact, now I'm wondering more and more if that was the primary dealer meeting discussion back on July 29. Something to the effect of, "you know, with the Tea Party and Congressional fighting over the debt ceiling there just isn't political will for a round of QE3. It would take a sizable market correction in order to justify further QE at this juncture."
Anyway, my question is, with most of Friday's move being inline, as opposed to divergence, on the shorter time frames (if I'm understanding and remembering correctly), I'm wondering if you've given thought to that scenario and if/how you would be able to recognize it vs. your own expectation for a good bounce based on the 30 & 60 minute time frames. Couldn't the bounce indicated by them come after Jackson Hole just as well?"
I've been very suspicious of the Fed/Primary Dealer meeting on July 29th, I think a lot more was said there then we know about and that's when the trouble in the market started, the following market day which was a Monday, and soon after when we started picking up hints of divergences. From the FOMC statement, it didn't seem like they had the will to try anything at all, but who knows, seeing the underlying action and understanding it are two different things entirely.
One of my responses was, I think we would start to see positive divergences on the daily charts. Last night I posted what could turn in to a positive divergence on several charts, today we have the start of a daily positive divergence. Like I said, the divergences start on the short timeframes and accrue until they spill over in to the next longest timeframe and so on and the longest timeframes (daily charts) show the most important divergences. So here's today's change from a maybe to a pretty solid looking "It looks like it will be"
The DIA daily chart as of today
It would be pretty spectacular if 3C picked up on QE3 or something like it a month or more in advance.
No comments:
Post a Comment