Martin Armstrong Discussion

[sidhujag]

Was doing some research and Martin Armstrong has quite a few totally wrong calls like this one:

DOW 32000 in 2015

http://www.silverdoctors.com/martin-armstrong-the-stock-market-will-double-by-2015/

32k is the number i got too without armstrong.. never know timing.

[DigiLab]

http://armstrongeconomics-wp.s3.amazonaws.com/2015/09/FEDFOR-M-9-28-2015.jpg

Guys, how the above can be interpreted? The way I see it, FEDs would rise the rate in October, but not quite in a small step.
E.g. maybe 1% or 2%, and then in November in December trim it down for, let's say around 0.25%, and then up for around 0.25% in January??

[altcoinUK]

Was doing some research and Martin Armstrong has quite a few totally wrong calls like this one:

DOW 32000 in 2015

http://www.silverdoctors.com/martin-armstrong-the-stock-market-will-double-by-2015/

No one's right every time . The 32000-35000 thing is predicated on some sort of "phase shift" IIRC which didn't happen

I can understand that no one is right all the time. But being wrong by such magnitude is quite shocking.

SP at 3000
http://www.talkmarkets.com/content/us-markets/sp500-still-on-track-to-test-3000-level?post=47979

Gold might be $907 in 2 weeks
http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/11033

Armstrong said that if certain events happen than the market could be 32K. He never said the market will be definitely 32k in 2015. He projected 18K will be very likely and he was right about that.
Anyway, it still can be in the 20K range if the low retest happen quickly and then the slingshot move up occur as well.

[altcoinUK]

Guys, how the above can be interpreted? The way I see it, FEDs would rise the rate in October, but not quite in a small step.
E.g. maybe 1% or 2%, and then in November in December trim it down for, let's say around 0.25%, and then up for around 0.25% in January??

The FED will definitely not raise 1-2% in October and I don't think that diagram suggest that. As Armstrong says, the FED is completely powerless from now on - they lost all their credibility to do anything about the economy. Though a new QE could make some noise temporary in the markets.

[TPTB_need_war]

Was doing some research and Martin Armstrong has quite a few totally wrong calls like this one:

DOW 32000 in 2015

http://www.silverdoctors.com/martin-armstrong-the-stock-market-will-double-by-2015/

No one's right every time . The 32000-35000 thing is predicated on some sort of "phase shift" IIRC which didn't happen

I can understand that no one is right all the time. But being wrong by such magnitude is quite shocking.

SP at 3000
http://www.talkmarkets.com/content/us-markets/sp500-still-on-track-to-test-3000-level?post=47979

Gold might be $907 in 2 weeks
http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/11033

Armstrong said that if certain events happen than the market could be 32K. He never said the market will be definitely 32k in 2015. He projected 18K will be very likely and he was right about that.
Anyway, it still can be in the 20K range if the low retest happen quickly and then the slingshot move up occur as well.

Why do you retards keep bringing up the same FUD over and over again, when I have explained this several times in this thread. If you fuckers are too lazy to read the thread, then why the fuck are you commenting here! You are pissing me off when your laziness and desire to spread misinformation.

I was reading Armstrong's blog daily from August 2012 forward. It was on the US stock market dip in August, that I read him predict a potential 32,000 - 40,000 top for the US stock market which could come as early as 2015.75 or could be delayed until 2017.9. He stated clearly that we'd have to wait for the closing price for the year 2014 before we would know for sure, but that 18,000 would be the first target and this would be achieved before 2015.75. Which is exactly what happened.

As time went on, he explained that the 32,000 - 40,000 would either come as a phase transition of public assets if the US stock market remained aligned with confidence in government. But over time it became apparent that the US stock market was aligning with private assets (it had phased shifted) and thus the phase transition would be delayed until after 2015.75 when the rest of the world would be stampeding into the dollar because the $9 trillion QE ended up as a carry trade (ZIRP in dollars and higher interest rates in emerging markets) abroad and now it is short the dollar (bond issues in dollars abroad). He first noted this some time in 2012 or 2013 where he wrote that there were massive dollar loans in the third world countries, e.g. Petronas in Brazil and real estate development companies (e.g. I was seeing dollar bond issues every week by major corporations in the Philippines).

That 32,000 - 40,000 DJIA target is coming before 2017.9.

Here are the blog posts I found from 2013 and 2014 about the dollar short abroad:

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/10553

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/10527

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/12994

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/24120


And here are the ones I could dig up about the stock market predictions:

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/will-the-dow-reach-30000-by-2015-0809.pdf

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/36610

A closing BELOW the Monthly Bearish at 15550 would warn of a potential March 2016 low with still the swing to new highs as early as 2017/2018.

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/16229

Currently, our projections for the Dow are 20,000 for 2015.75 with the extreme being 32,000. It seems that the 32,000 is more likely hit on the next cycle, for if that were to be reached on this cycle in 2015, OMG the aftermath may be catastrophic. Nonetheless, this is a Phase Transition that we cannot rule out just yet.

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/24179

A Phase Transition is typically 52 to 59 weeks in general. This is the broad measurement and not the fine-tuning. Looking closely at the market currently, we were due for a correction because of all the talking heads have to get trapped. That is the fuel for a Phase Transition.

It remains possible to still be flat and churning into 2015.75 and then a cycle inversion unfolds with the market rising into 2017-2018 as the main hedge against banks, pensions, and governments. November is still our target for a near-term correct low. Lets see where we go from here. We must respect that this is a Sovereign Debt Crisis. In such circumstances, smart capital simply moves to Private asset sectors out of Public.

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/34170

Each aspect of PRICE, TIME, and Pattern Recognition (Global Market Watch) is entirely independent. Therefore, we gave three levels on the Dow the 18500, 23000, and 32000/40000. When we introduce TIME, the first opportunity for a major high was 2015.75 and the three price targets would then come into play. So while the maximum objective would have been 32000/40,000 as early as 2015, we have been unable to get through the first target at 18500. Hence, if we saw a price advance to 23,000 with the TIME of the ECM (October 1, 2015), then we should expect a correction because we met both TIME and PRICE. Failing to reach that next threshold at 23,000 means the next TIME target becomes 2017. Exceeding 23,000 before TIME means you then go to the next target in PRICE, being the 32,000/40,000 area.

We identify time windows and for such targets; to form important highs or lows there MUST be the alignment of both TIME and PRICE unfolding often according to Pattern Recognition.

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/36343

The first possible time target coming out of the 2009 low was 2015.75 for the Dow to reach a Phase Transition and then a crash and burn. We stated in 2011 that the market was off to new highs, and Barrons even covered that forecast more as a curiosity. We have constantly warned that the Phase Transition was not confirmed yet.

Indeed, the Phase Transition clearly shifted back in 2014, and appeared to be postponed into 2017. The three price targets were 18500, 23000, and the 30000–40000 extreme target. At the beginning of 2015, we warned that it did not appear likely that the market would exceed 18500 on the Dow, as it appeared that it would crawl along resistance forming a high in May. So far, that has been the pattern.

Now the question confronting us is how long of a contraction do we see. A False Move must take place with a minimum of two to three months, which suggests an August low. If we see lower lows intraday or if September closes lower than August with a new intraday low in the Dow (not NASDAQ), then we may have a different pattern ahead. Nonetheless, if this pattern with an August low holds, then we may be off to the Phase Transition coming out of the hole. This would be confirmed by electing Monthly Bullish generated from an August low.

In terms of price, we should be aware of this pattern development by exceeding 18500. The next hurdle will be 23000. Exceeding that level will put us into a Phase Transition, and the extreme target in the 30000–40000 level will result in a disastrous outcome. This would most likely be coupled with gold as all tangible assets rise when driven by the shift from public to private.

This is the pattern and the requirements to see that unfold. It is not a forecast and should not be seen as a promotional forecast like the gold promoters. If you do not understand this type of analysis, you are not ready for the professional level, so go back to your normal viewing channels — this blog is obviously not for you. You belong in the guru follower circuit.

[jehst]

Was doing some research and Martin Armstrong has quite a few totally wrong calls like this one:

DOW 32000 in 2015

http://www.silverdoctors.com/martin-armstrong-the-stock-market-will-double-by-2015/

No one's right every time . The 32000-35000 thing is predicated on some sort of "phase shift" IIRC which didn't happen

I can understand that no one is right all the time. But being wrong by such magnitude is quite shocking.

SP at 3000
http://www.talkmarkets.com/content/us-markets/sp500-still-on-track-to-test-3000-level?post=47979

Gold might be $907 in 2 weeks
http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/11033

Armstrong said that if certain events happen than the market could be 32K. He never said the market will be definitely 32k in 2015. He projected 18K will be very likely and he was right about that.
Anyway, it still can be in the 20K range if the low retest happen quickly and then the slingshot move up occur as well.

Why do you retards keep bringing up the same FUD over and over again, when I have explained this several times in this thread. If you fuckers are too lazy to read the thread, then why the fuck are you commenting here! You are pissing me off when your laziness and desire to spread misinformation.

I was reading Armstrong's blog daily from August 2012 forward. It was on the US stock market dip in August, that I read him predict a potential 32,000 - 48,000 top for the US stock market which could come as early as 2015.75 or could be delayed until 2017.9. He stated clearly that we'd have to wait for the closing price for the year 2014 before we would know for sure, but that 18,000 would be the first target and this would be achieved before 2015.75. Which is exactly what happened.

As time went on, he explained that the 32,000 - 48,000 would either come as a phase transition of public assets if the US stock market remained aligned with confidence in government. But over time it became apparent that the US stock market was aligning with private assets (it had phased shifted) and thus the phase transition would be delayed until after 2015.75 when the rest of the world would be stampeding into the dollar because the $9 trillion QE ended up as a carry trade (ZIRP in dollars and higher interest rates in emerging markets) abroad and now it is short the dollar (bond issues in dollars abroad). He first noted this some time in 2012 or 2013 where he wrote that there were massive dollar loans in the third world countries, e.g. Petronas in Brazil and real estate development companies (e.g. I was seeing dollar bond issues every week by major corporations in the Philippines).

That 32,000 - 48,000 DJIA target is coming before 2017.9.

Which companies will do best after money starts rushing into US stocks? Coca Cola? MacDonalds? I'm picking companies with strong brands with commodities-based costs. Their costs should go way down but they should still be able to charge similar prices. Their products are lowcost enough that people won't cut back on them even if the economy isn't doing so hot.

[TPTB_need_war]

Apparently contrarian opinion is not welcome in here   The problem with Martin Armstrong is there is always a "if" in his prediction. And he is already backing off with his "Big Bang 2015.75" (which is today by the way) stating the effects will take time and we won't see the consequences before xxx months (which is not the definiton of a big bang). Anyway I will leave it to it as I prefer to focus on real economists like Jim Rickards, Harry Dent and co.

He has never backed off his BIG BANG. He has always stated that is when the sovereign debt and socialism contagion would accelerate. And it is. The refugee crisis in Europe isn't a big bang   The impending blow up of Doucebag Bank isn't a big bang  

Look I sold all my gold, silver, and Bitcoin at much higher prices because of Armstrong's correct prediction. I stashed away dollars instead of pesos back when the peso was 40 - 43 to the dollar (now at 47) because of Armstrong's correct prediction.

I also alerted everyone to get out of the DJIA before the recent corrections from the 18,500 high because of Armstrong's correct predictions.

And now I am telling you that the dollar and US stocks will go skyhigh was from later in 2016 to late in 2017.

This "ifs" you refer to are about waiting for the requirements of the patterns to take form, before making the confirmation and decision. You'd be idiot (which you apparently are) if you advocated otherwise.

There is no problem with contrarian opinion if you get your damn facts straight and aren't too lazy to RTFT (read the fucking thread).

[smooth]

So, the lucky ones who borrow at the lower rate then get a competitive advantage vs. those who borrowed at the older, higher rate

Not lucky. Favored. That makes things even worse.

[SmoothCurves]

If Martin's model is to be believed. How low can we expect Bitcoin to go? and by When? Is Under $100 in Spring of '16 a safe bet?

[sidhujag]

32k is what many are calling for to lure average joes back in to holding the big bag for the big bang

[sidhujag]

If Martin's model is to be believed. How low can we expect Bitcoin to go? and by When? Is Under $100 in Spring of '16 a safe bet?

I think bitcoin does not go low, he doesnt state anything about bitcoin and perhaps because its new, no cycles to go off of, but I personally believe its cycle low has been achieved and through either cycle, public or private bitcoin will benefit regardless of what usd is doing. Thats me personally though.

[smooth]

If Martin's model is to be believed. How low can we expect Bitcoin to go? and by When? Is Under $100 in Spring of '16 a safe bet?

I think bitcoin does not go low, he doesnt state anything about bitcoin

Dollar going high is pretty much the same as bitcoin going low, all else being equal.

[sidhujag]

If Martin's model is to be believed. How low can we expect Bitcoin to go? and by When? Is Under $100 in Spring of '16 a safe bet?

I think bitcoin does not go low, he doesnt state anything about bitcoin

Dollar going high is pretty much the same as bitcoin going low, all else being equal.

I dont think we can make that assumption, dollar up in todays world all else being equal usually meant equities would be going down (lower profitability) however they are positively correlated again like prior to the dot com boom/bust. In the same way bitcoin/equities/dollar can be positively correlated even if prices/profits are denominated in the underlying instrument we are measuring.

It just means that as strong as USD may be, bitcoin may be stronger. It wouldnt take much money to make it go up its pretty illiquid (and its not zero sum), so even some profits being taken on USD longs going into bitcoin may help bitcoin be stronger than USD.

[smooth]

If Martin's model is to be believed. How low can we expect Bitcoin to go? and by When? Is Under $100 in Spring of '16 a safe bet?

I think bitcoin does not go low, he doesnt state anything about bitcoin

Dollar going high is pretty much the same as bitcoin going low, all else being equal.

I dont think we can make that assumption, dollar up in todays world all else being equal usually meant equities would be going down (lower profitability) however they are positively correlated again like prior to the dot com boom/bust. In the same way bitcoin/equities/dollar can be positively correlated even if prices/profits are denominated in the underlying instrument we are measuring.

It just means that as strong as USD may be, bitcoin may be stronger. It wouldnt take much money to make it go up its pretty illiquid (and its not zero sum), so even some profits being taken on USD longs going into bitcoin may help bitcoin be stronger than USD.

Sure Bitcoin can go up, but you need some reason for money to want to go into it. I don't see a reason with the dollar being strong, but that does't mean it can't happen.

[jehst]

If dollars can align with bonds sometimes and dollars can align with stocks sometimes, we should also consider that bitcoin might also shift "phases": it may align with stocks sometimes OR bitcoin might align with commodities sometimes depending on market conditions, or something else, or nothing at all. I've seen evidence of all of these possibilities. For example, bitcoin almost always drops along with the stock markets on big down days. Bitcoin has also dropped with commodities over the past year. It's hard to say what it's truly aligned with, if anything.

Moving on, I theorize that if Chinese, Japanese, and Europeans all suffer diminished purchasing power due to their incomes (which are sticky, and will not rise as quickly as inflation will hit), then they'll be less able to buy bitcoin.

My hunch is that bitcoin will align with commodities rather than US stocks.

Why?

 If the reason for people rushing into the dollar and US stocks is because they are afraid and there's nowhere else to go, then I don't think that reason will also apply to bitcoin. Bitcoin is not somewhere you go when you are afraid. I think bitcoin will drop even more than gold as commodities in general plummet.

[trollercoaster]

Bitcoin is not ready to be adopted by the masses, it's illiquid and most of the late adopters are speculators, they will be forced to sell or watch their money evaporate.

Stubbornly holding onto bitcoin when the late adopters need cash doesn't make sense, I think the price will fall rather hard.

[SmoothCurves]

If Martin's model is to be believed. How low can we expect Bitcoin to go? and by When? Is Under $100 in Spring of '16 a safe bet?

I think bitcoin does not go low, he doesnt state anything about bitcoin and perhaps because its new, no cycles to go off of, but I personally believe its cycle low has been achieved and through either cycle, public or private bitcoin will benefit regardless of what usd is doing. Thats me personally though.

He predicts a bottom for private assets in general and Bitcoin is one of these private assets. Can someone please fill me in on his model in regards to being back tested 6,000 years? What data does he have that is 6,000 years old?

[sidhujag]

If Martin's model is to be believed. How low can we expect Bitcoin to go? and by When? Is Under $100 in Spring of '16 a safe bet?

I think bitcoin does not go low, he doesnt state anything about bitcoin and perhaps because its new, no cycles to go off of, but I personally believe its cycle low has been achieved and through either cycle, public or private bitcoin will benefit regardless of what usd is doing. Thats me personally though.

He predicts a bottom for private assets in general and Bitcoin is one of these private assets. Can someone please fill me in on his model in regards to being back tested 6,000 years? What data does he have that is 6,000 years old?

why does it have to be a private asset maybe its a public asset as in its for the people.. i dont htink he can classify bitcoin because its something new.

[jehst]

If Martin's model is to be believed. How low can we expect Bitcoin to go? and by When? Is Under $100 in Spring of '16 a safe bet?

I think bitcoin does not go low, he doesnt state anything about bitcoin and perhaps because its new, no cycles to go off of, but I personally believe its cycle low has been achieved and through either cycle, public or private bitcoin will benefit regardless of what usd is doing. Thats me personally though.

He predicts a bottom for private assets in general and Bitcoin is one of these private assets. Can someone please fill me in on his model in regards to being back tested 6,000 years? What data does he have that is 6,000 years old?

why does it have to be a private asset maybe its a public asset as in its for the people.. i dont htink he can classify bitcoin because its something new.

Classifying bitcoin is easy. The definition of private = not public. Bitcoin is not public. Therefore, it's private.

[sidhujag]

If Martin's model is to be believed. How low can we expect Bitcoin to go? and by When? Is Under $100 in Spring of '16 a safe bet?

I think bitcoin does not go low, he doesnt state anything about bitcoin and perhaps because its new, no cycles to go off of, but I personally believe its cycle low has been achieved and through either cycle, public or private bitcoin will benefit regardless of what usd is doing. Thats me personally though.

He predicts a bottom for private assets in general and Bitcoin is one of these private assets. Can someone please fill me in on his model in regards to being back tested 6,000 years? What data does he have that is 6,000 years old?

why does it have to be a private asset maybe its a public asset as in its for the people.. i dont htink he can classify bitcoin because its something new.

Classifying bitcoin is easy. The definition of private = not public. Bitcoin is not public. Therefore, it's private.

I dont think it classifies as a traditional asset either way because we dont know what it will end up being.