Martin Armstrong Discussion

[Gumbi]

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/right-or-wrong-the-dark-side-of-human-nature/

"NOBODY can possibly be right all the time. This is why I try to emphasize that the numbers are the numbers and that all we can do is watch how everything unfolds... The number define the forecast – NOT my opinion. Most people forecast on what they “think” will happen. I do not play that game. My OPINION is no better than anyone else’s."

@trulycoined everyone here just talks about Armstrong's opinion but nobody seems to follow the reversals. Ultimately the numbers are the only thing worth paying attention too.

[1713525721]

1713525721

[1713525721]

1713525721

[1713525721]

1713525721

[AnonymousCoder]

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/right-or-wrong-the-dark-side-of-human-nature/

"NOBODY can possibly be right all the time. This is why I try to emphasize that the numbers are the numbers and that all we can do is watch how everything unfolds... The number define the forecast - NOT my opinion. Most people forecast on what they ?think? will happen. I do not play that game. My OPINION is no better than anyone else's."

@trulycoined everyone here just talks about Armstrong's opinion but nobody seems to follow the reversals. Ultimately the numbers are the only thing worth paying attention too.

Gumbi, don't repeat this BS. You are wasting your time. It is pointless to continue with this discussion because you will try to direct it on a circular path. WE are talking about Armstrong's predictions here. Martin Armstrong says Socrates does them. You are saying they are worthless.

But these reversals you mention fail like everything else. We have the proof. Please read again to get informed how badly the reversals that you try to sell us fail. As can be seen here it is not so much the problem that they fail, but the fact that you try to sell us that they don't fail:

As previously said, Gumbi's posts get replied to in a way that will remind him of the context in which we showed him that he is a charlatan.

Let him be reminded again that we have a model case where this behavior is documented in much detail. It actually saves time and effort to repeat this as opposed to wasting the time trying to argue this same type of thing without end.

Whatever smokescreen Gumbi and cohorts are coming up with now, they get this reply. I know Gumbi just wants this message to go away but I am not going to do him the favor. I am just not taking his baits for more nonsense any more.

The pattern is the same again and again: Pick one of the ambiguous conflicting Socrates signals in hindsight to argue the case. For us, there is no need to formulate a custom response to that. We use this model case as a standard response reply to show what these charlatans are doing.

I have an obligation to spread the message for the honest people, and as painful as it is for me, I am going to persevere until the Armstrong promoters shut up. So they are warned. The honest people have all the facts on their side.

AnonymousCoder"Quarterly reversal time unit is one quarter. Gold rallied before the quarter was over and no other signal in the opposite direction was available to indicate change of direction.

The time span is 1 to 3 units in time so the quarterly bearish reversal had 1 to 3 quarters before time was up.

Armstrong wrote on his private blog on the first of March our quarterly level of the model generated a bullish reversal at the end of the year reversing its short position and going long. This also signaled that gold would rally from the $1060 area and should test the next bullish reversal at the $1347 level."

Not sure if you are aware or not but you are losing this discussion.

Here we go. You are providing the proof of my assertion yourself!

Hindsight, Fraud. This hindsight message is fraudulent misrepresentation of performance, pure fraud!
Now here you are saying, and I know you are speaking for Martin Armstrong, that


Martin Armstrong had this information, this bullish signal, the fact that his model went long - at the end of the year - but at the same time failed to tell his clients?

In fact he sent the opposite signal to his clients at the time!

If he knew this at the time when he claimed the system went long, and let's assume for the sake of argument that what you say is true then he could have been trading against his clients because he published this signal only three months later.

You are not worth the respect of a single honest being on earth! You are a fraud!


And yes, I have all the reports. How could I otherwise quote them? I have everything!

More importantly, all other people who lost, they have everything as well.



Here is a detailed time line of the events:


Quarterly Superposition Event in Gold 2015


Martin Armstrong is a charlatan, and he spent 11 years in jail for that reason but he has not changed.

Read this blog starting here to find out more about computerized fraud.


See armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog

[dibley8899]

I've pitched in on you tube but could do with some help!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1UaIqpvLQEo

[AnonymousCoder]

I've pitched in on you tube but could do with some help!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1UaIqpvLQEo

Thanks. Obviously still some followers. I hope that people can see the low quality of this just by listening to the interview. As you said, we need more help. There are not that many comments. Don't forget to down-vote the video at the top.

Martin Armstrong is a charlatan, and he spent 11 years in jail for a reason.

Read this blog starting here to find out more about computerized fraud.

See armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog

[T111]

Stopped reading and following Marty long time ago, and dropped him completely after the Dec dump and fiasco of Marty telling his subscribers NOT to go long and wait for better opportunity in Jan/Feb, but I did a quick search the other day, it's hilarious and ridiculous does anyone even know what the forecast even is anymore? All you hardcore Marty followers, he got interviews just from few months ago talking about Dow at least 35000 into 2021, and now it's bear market for 2020 and on? LOL even his dollar view seem has changed? And not to mention how he sooo missed n look like a fool after gold's price action lately. Still haven't seen anything change, Marty still doing what he's best at covering both sides just to sell and profit on his BS. And thanks for this discussion it's beautiful, hope ppl wake up to this fraud before they get themselves ruined. I found Marty shortly after Brexit vote 2016 and did meet several frustrated ppl at the WEC 2016 and not long after, understanding perfectly why that was the case.

[DigiLab]

I've figured the book will sell out, so I was checking regularly. And as soon as it was available, I did order, two copies, one for myself, and other as a gift (to be backup copy as well). One should arrive mid January, and the other the end of January (different locations worldwide). I hope it will go through and get the book.
I'll buy mostly whatever writing Armstrong has to sell on the matter of economy and finance, below 100$. And for this book I was ready to pay even more. Through his blog I finally started to understand the economy, and now I'm just laughing to the Austrians, Keynesians, Monetarist, and other academia stuff.
No comment on Socrates, no experience with it.

[AnonymousCoder]

I've figured the book will sell out, so I was checking regularly. And as soon as it was available, I did order, two copies, one for myself, and other as a gift (to be backup copy as well). One should arrive mid January, and the other the end of January (different locations worldwide). I hope it will go through and get the book.
I'll buy mostly whatever writing Armstrong has to sell on the matter of economy and finance, below 100$. And for this book I was ready to pay even more. Through his blog I finally started to understand the economy, and now I'm just laughing to the Austrians, Keynesians, Monetarist, and other academia stuff.
No comment on Socrates, no experience with it.

Martin Armstrong has something for everybody. You can get Socrates for under $100, actually $50. It has all the relevant weekly and monthly reversals. And as Gumbi, who speaks as an authority on the matter, if he is not the Guru himself says:

...
everyone here just talks about Armstrong's opinion but nobody seems to follow the reversals. Ultimately the numbers are the only thing worth paying attention too.

But be warned, if the reversals fail as they do like anything else, then Armstrong has both sides covered because he will say you cannot trade the reversals - you need - whatever fits in hindsight - the ECM, the Superposition events, the forecast arrays, the Energy models. You will sure become an expert on this.

Martin Armstrong is a charlatan, and he spent 11 years in jail for a reason.

Read this blog starting here to find out more about computerized fraud.


See armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog

[DigiLab]

Total, one came at USD102.98, and other USD109.10, Europe and Canada. I don't think that one would be willing to sell you his copy. But I assume there will be ebook available for free download, that's usually the case with other books.
As for trading, I guess I wouldn't pay for Socrates, will stick to common stuff (Fibonacci, ...). Would like to have the numbers of major reversals though. Someone here provided a way to calculate those, haven't looked thoroughly into that yet.

[dibley8899]

Digi.....why would you want to buy a book from charlatan.....do you actually think you would benefit from something that he has just made up as he goes along to be as ambiguous as possible so its takes quite a time to realise youve been mugged.

Possibly he only supplied amazon with a handful of books ensuring it would sell out creating the feeling of a mad rush to buy the book when in fact hardly any have been purchased but its a nice useful tool to encourage some buying from those that just need a nudge to be fleeced out of their money.

I have noticed that these radio interviews posted on SM have contained less and less forecasts over time as they have to due to more and more of the forecasts being incorrect so he can't mention them without having to eat some home cooked humble pie. The idea is when wrong to then drift on to theory  and politics which he has, if the forecasts had of been correct he would just be continuing with the forecasts and not theory etc......

Meanwhile I am getting a little red in the face holding my breath waiting for Gumbi to post his trading account that has killed the market using the reversals. Rather then reversal possibly its upside down

Enjoy the book

[AnonymousCoder]

I looked at the table of contents in the blog. A big chunk of it looks like rehash of blog posts. I also think, based on those contents, he could have used more examples. Perhaps it will be overly wordy and repetitive. It also looks like it talks about some common problems of today, but not something that includes all relevant socioeconomic aspects. I suspect that a lot of important points were not included that were on the blog. Armstrong generally lacks clarity and conciseness- perhaps because he has made a living off being this way, he finds it difficult to revert. We'll see.

Indeed. In the interview at the beginning Martin Armstrong says this $100 book is a work of a lifetime and it took him four weeks to write it when he was away from home in Asia.

In 2014 he wrote: I have three teams working right now on three of the four books I am trying to complete.

So what is anyone expecting? Listen to the interview HOW he answers questions. He is lying about everything as always. He can't even talk normally. His excuse for this nonsense is that he is a "prolific writer".

I can't understand how anyone who has read this blog would even consider wasting any time on the idea of buying anything from someone who is obviously running a scam.

If people are still buying his books, then they WILL get what they deserve - and perhaps even what they want - which is nothing more than his public blogs in book form . Which is what he is a prolific writer of. Makes sense, doesn't it?


Martin Armstrong is a charlatan, and he spent 11 years in jail for a reason.

Read this blog starting here to find out more about computerized fraud.


See armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog.

[nstrdms]

According to MA reversals are generated using advance AI.

Well ... just human intelligence can generate them quite easily

Reversals methodology deciphered by Arthur another deceived Princeton Attendees in April 2016

"I'm interested in discussing how the reversals are generated. I'll start with what I have
observed. It's better to use the actual numbers from the charts provided Socrates, that way it's
much more precise.

Every time the market exceeds the previous tick's high or low, a set of reversals is generated. If
that new high or low is not exceeded for the next tick, that reversal stays. I think this is what MA
is referring to when he talks about the "What-If" models.

There are 4 prices in a set of reversals.

These are determined from the timings 3, 5, 13, 26. (for stocks he seems to use 4, 8, 16, 23, however for the Dow he seems to be using 3, 5, 13, 26).

So if a new high is made, the low from the previous 3rd tick is a bearish reversal, the low from the
previous 5th tick is another bearish reversal, the low from the previous 13th tick is another
bearish reversal, and the low from the previous 26th tick is another bearish reversal. The same is
true if a new low is made, in this case the previous nth high is used.
If there is a holiday and the markets were closed, that still counts as a day.

For example, looking at the NY Gold Nearest Futures on the daily level, from the 128780 high on
March 11, the reaction low so far was 120600 on March 28. The 4 reversals generated were:
123530 (26, high from Feb 19)
124980 (3, high from Mar 23)
125670 (5, high from Mar 21)
126570 (13, high from Mar 9)

MA talks about how 1266 is the key bullish reversal, perhaps it is because it is the 4th reversal
from the reaction low, once all 4 of those reversals are taken out, the market moves to the next
level of trading.

Another example with the NY Gold Nearest Futures on the quarterly level, the low in Q4 2015
was 104540. MA wrote that this generated a minor quarterly bullish reversal at 993, while at the
same time we elected a bearish reversal at 1112. Here are the set of 4 reversals from that low:
99210 (26, high from Q2 2009)
130780 (3, high from Q1 2015)
134680 (5, high from Q3 2014)
179000 (13, high from Q3 2012)
So the 993 reversal seem to be more precisely 99210. Sometimes the reversal that is generated is
already below or above the market, like in this case.

You can generate reversals at all levels of time. Sometimes the market will bounce off a reversal,
sometimes the market will blast through a whole cluster of reversals."

Thanks to him for debunking the Socrates fraud

...but according to Martin (Nostradamus?) Armstrong, "The Reversals are not generated from technical analysis. They are based entirely upon physics with very complex formulas. Therefore, technical analysis can provide visual confirmation and target objectives. Timing is the dominant factor, for if you run out of time before a Directional Change, then the Reversals will confirm or deny a change in that directional trend."

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/armstrongeconomics101/training-tools/reversal-v-technical-analysis/

[AnonymousCoder]

Alright. So our prolific liar says reversals are based on Physics.

We have another more general description that must be true whether it is called "based on Physics" or not. "Physics" sounds fancy so that is why Armstrong is using the word. Perhaps a programmer has even told him so. He is also using the word "AI" even while he acknowledged that "Neural Nets I have never seen work". He is talking like a village idiot. Where is the value of that statement then if we cannot trust his words?

The inescapable truth is that the reversals are based on a single time series - nothing more. Therefore, the general terms "Technical Analysis" or "Time Series Analysis" are in fact accurately describing what they are based on.

To summarize, if we are ascending from a previous low, we partition vertically between our high point and that previous low into segments that give us the bearish reversal values. Not surprisingly, the partitioning algorithm creates reversals that are near (typically below) previous support values. If there is no way to get four support zones out of that, then we get double and triple reversals, or simply reversals that are clustered around the support zones. So yes, they are based on technical analysis, and yes, you can do them by hand.

Martin Armstrong is a charlatan, and he spent 11 years in jail for a reason.

Read this blog starting here to find out more about computerized fraud.


See armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog

[trulycoined]

Oh and he said so many were sold that he is already on the third edition- someone please let him know that's not editions work. Also, based on the table of contents and such, a 'solution' based on something the ancient Romans did occupied only a few pages at the end of a 300+ page volume isn't confidence inspiring either. Marty/strikeEagle, I know you're reading this. Please make a proper good edition encompassing all aspects of socioeconomics. Go through your blog again and put every bit of unique idea as it relates to socioeconomics in. Don't use a single example to make a case. Present a unified theory. And delete Socrates, it doesn't work.

... And then send the works for peer review from a credible source.

Maybe then MA can get his name proudly stamped into the history books of economics, rather than have the shame of the annals of incarceration as his legacy.

[Gumbi]

Why don’t you all read the book first then talk shit about it.  It's hilarious you have already conclude the book is worthless without having even read a single page because you desperately want  Armstrong to be a fraud, you would be very disappointed if you found out he was not.

 The problem is you want Armstrong to do the thinking and forecasting for you, you don't want to do it yourself and since the pro version came out this year there is no need for Armstrong to utter another word.  We  elected 5 monthly bullish reversals in 2019 and the first was in January  we have not elected a single monthly bearish reversal this year!!!!  but you want to cling to some post he made when  Socrates is updating every single day/week/month. You thought Armstrong was some prophet that you could just blindly follow and knew every move in advance but that’s not how it works. You cannot foresee what reversals will be elected in the future, once reversals are elected only then do you know the direction. Any forecast by Armstrong has to be confirmed or denied by electing reversals! you should only follow the numbers not Armstrong's opinion.

  Bikefront It was no new highs in 2019 on a SUSTAINABLE BASIS and a high in line with the ECM points to a sharp correction into Jan 2021. You want to say Socrates does not work but how many monthly reversals have you actually traded? And what was your exit strategy? Maybe your strategy was the problem so can you give an example of a trade you made on either the Dow/Nasdaq/S&P 500/gold/silver/Crude oil/EURUSD/GBPUSD using Socrates.  

Nobody has been able to give even a single example of where the reversal system went wrong since its full release in 2019, how is this possible  

[nstrdms]

Why don’t you all read the book first then talk shit about it.  It's hilarious you have already conclude the book is worthless without having even read a single page because you desperately want  Armstrong to be a fraud, you would be very disappointed if you found out he was not.

 The problem is you want Armstrong to do the thinking and forecasting for you, you don't want to do it yourself and since the pro version came out this year there is no need for Armstrong to utter another word.  We  elected 5 monthly bullish reversals in 2019 and the first was in January  we have not elected a single monthly bearish reversal this year!!!!  but you want to cling to some post he made when  Socrates is updating every single day/week/month. You thought Armstrong was some prophet that you could just blindly follow and knew every move in advance but that’s not how it works. You cannot foresee what reversals will be elected in the future, once reversals are elected only then do you know the direction. Any forecast by Armstrong has to be confirmed or denied by electing reversals! you should only follow the numbers not Armstrong's opinion.

  Bikefront It was no new highs in 2019 on a SUSTAINABLE BASIS and a high in line with the ECM points to a sharp correction into Jan 2021. You want to say Socrates does not work but how many monthly reversals have you actually traded? And what was your exit strategy? Maybe your strategy was the problem so can you give an example of a trade you made on either the Dow/Nasdaq/S&P 500/gold/silver/Crude oil/EURUSD/GBPUSD using Socrates.  

Nobody has been able to give even a single example of where the reversal system went wrong since its full release in 2019, how is this possible  

Armstrong said the global decline low would be into Jan 2020. Now you’re saying he said 2021.
“ The Economic Confidence Model has called every turning point in the global economy, right down to the economic decline currently into January 2020.”

What does “into” mean in this context? Before, during, after? Too ambiguous.

[MA_talk]

Merry Xmas and a Happy New Year to everyone here.  Sorry that I have been away.  Too many things that I had to handle.


Gumbi,

  Armstrong always claims that his system watches all global capital, and everyone else forecasts in isolated markets, while he can make accurate predictions because all financial markets affect each other.

  So let's review his prediction for bitcoin price at the end of 2018 here:

https://armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com/p/armstrong-said-on-nov-26th-2018-that.html


  Anybody who took his advice based on annual closing would have been burned so bad.


  ANY honest person with any integrity would have gone back and reviewed his own forecast, and tries to save the readers who made the bad trades based on his advice at the EARLIEST possible moment, if he has made any mistakes.  But NOT Armstrong!!

  WHY?  Because Armstrong is NEVER concerned about any people who read his public or private blog.

  Throughout 2019, he simply will NOT talk about his own mistakes on bitcoin.  Well, probably in his entire "forecasting" career, he simply never discussed any of his forecasting mistakes.  He/Socrates needs to be trading god, and must continue to maintain an image of zero mistakes.


  In logic, the method of proof by contradiction is by starting with an assumption, and shows that it leads to a contradiction.  And thus you will know that the original starting assumption is simply false.  As an example, ECM is 8.6 years, and also 8.615 years.  So if 8.6=8.615, you subtract 8.6 from both sides, and you get 0 = 0.015.  Then you multiply 1000 on both side, and you get 0 = 15.  Then you divide both side by 15, and you get 0 = 1.  Then you add 1 on both sides, and you get 1 = 2.  And then once you repeat this process of talking non-sense, you can essentially show that 2 = 3, and 3 = 4, and all the numbers in the entire universe are equal!!  That is how Armstrong said HIMSELF that ECM date was 10/1/2015, and ALSO 10/7/2015.  Two different dates when his model would be accurate down to the very day every time.

https://armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com/p/economic-confidence-model.html


  So by starting out the assumption that Armstrong is able to make successful predictions on all financial markets because his "super-computer" watches all global capital, and that his own prediction on bitcoin has been shown to be so terribly wrong, you know that the original assumption is simply NOT correct.

  So if Armstrong cannot "predict" successfully in one single market of bitcoin, how can we know that he can predict stocks or gold successfully?  For a charlatan who makes easily 50+ "predictions" every year in so many different markets, you bet that he can hit the bull's eye in one of the 50+ shots.  But the problem is WHICH of the 50+ predictions will be correct?  That is essentially the same as saying that I will get a head when I flip a coin every time, and about 50% of the time, I will be right.  Then I will simply review the successful "predictions", and ignore all the failures.  I will be a trading god.

  And of course, Armstrong wants to lay the blame on the traders/readers.  His "forecasting" keeps changing by keeping track of the markets in  HINDSIGHT whether it's late by 1 min, 1 day, or 1 month.  It's keeping track, and does NOT SEEM to be wrong.  But there is ZERO profit that can be made from a yesterday's "prediction".  Gumbi and many pro-Armstrong people promised to show the trading record on this forum, and NONE has been able to shown a consistent profitable trading method that is BASED on Armstrong's models.  NONE, but lots of excuses like "I'm just not going to show it to you".  Well, if you have time to post here, then you can show it.  Otherwise, there is no point to argue FOR Armstrong, or you can just stay away from the forum.  I'm not even asking people to post every trade that they make.  I'm only ASKING to post the trade based on the SAME selection criteria, and AHEAD of the time, NOT AFTER the fact, when trade is already in profits.  You may make 100 trades every month, but if you can post just 1 of them AHEAD of the time using the same consistent criteria, then this forum can productively study the results to see if it is statistically significant, and discuss the trading method.

  If you ask 1024 people to throw the coins 10 times, about 1 of the 1024 people will get 10 heads in a roll.  Similarly, we just need to make sure that such result is simply born out of pure chance, or based on trading skills.

[Gumbi]

@nstrdms
The ECM is the global economic cycle declining into 2020.05(18 Jan) I am referring to the US share market crashing into Jan 2021 if we rally into this ECM turning point in Jan 2020


@MA_talk

Welcome back

"I explained that the cycle was discovered from a study of the number of financial panics between 1683 and 1907 that was a total time period of 224 years. There were 26 panics within that 224 year period that produced 8.615384615."
"this business cycle can be calculated on quarter-cycle intervals of 2.15 years into the final peak for this major wave formation of December 24th, 2032."
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/writings/1999-2/the-business-cycle-and-the-future/

10/07/015 is simply the ECM in 2.15 year intervals, it’s a quarter cycle of the ECM 8.6/4 = 2.15


The dates of the ECM cannot be changed and have been documented well in advance. I also posted a trade where 2 major daily bearish reversals  were elected on the 1st of October with a big gap to the next  and it was successful.

Dow elected 2 daily bearish reversals at the close today, next level of support lies at 26062 on the monthly level,

I have entered a short position at 26545  and exit will be around the 26062 zone.

...
I have just exited my trade at 26102 just above the monthly bearish

Btw AnonymousCoder for this trade I sold 18 contracts on the Dow because the reversal system is never wrong  

Welcome to the exciting world of single observation statistics!


Read this blog starting at page 273 to find out more about computerized fraud

See armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog

no I have not played this correctly. The market  should test the next daily bearish at 25833. Today is also a turning point so we should see a low at least on a intraday or closing basis.
If a reversal is penetrated intraday this often implies a move to the next in this case the weekly bearish has become the next area of support on the Dow.

 The reversal system is simply the best MAP possible when trading.

  For bitcoin we don't have the reversals just a single blog post how can we with any confidence going to conclude anything? Socrates doesn’t work like that where it's completely static and never changes we could of easily generated and elected a set of monthly reversals based on future price movement. That’s why that post doesn’t help because we don’t have all the information. It seems to be an error on the part of Armstrong but to conclude Socrates got it wrong simply cannot be determined.

[AnonymousCoder]

Why don't you all read the book first then talk shit about it. It's hilarious you have already conclude the book is worthless without having even read a single page because you desperately want Armstrong to be a fraud, you would be very disappointed if you found out he was not.
....

So we are supposed to spend $100 on a book where no review exists, and not even a single chapter is published? Your reaction is a perfect warning to all people NOT to buy it.

...
We elected 5 monthly bullish reversals in 2019 and the first was in January
...

We do NOT discuss any signals here given in hindsight. For your hindsight trick we have a standard response that will remind everybody how you tried to sell the ultimate reversal system failure as a success, the failure of a quarterly reversal that many remember:

As previously said, Gumbi's posts get replied to in a way that will remind him of the context in which we showed him that he is a charlatan.

Let him be reminded again that we have a model case where this behavior is documented in much detail. It actually saves time and effort to repeat this as opposed to wasting the time trying to argue this same type of thing without end.

Whatever smokescreen Gumbi and cohorts are coming up with now, they get this reply. I know Gumbi just wants this message to go away but I am not going to do him the favor. I am just not taking his baits for more nonsense any more.

The pattern is the same again and again: Pick one of the ambiguous conflicting Socrates signals in hindsight to argue the case. For us, there is no need to formulate a custom response to that. We use this model case as a standard response reply to show what these charlatans are doing.

I have an obligation to spread the message for the honest people, and as painful as it is for me, I am going to persevere until the Armstrong promoters shut up. So they are warned. The honest people have all the facts on their side.

AnonymousCoder"Quarterly reversal time unit is one quarter. Gold rallied before the quarter was over and no other signal in the opposite direction was available to indicate change of direction.

The time span is 1 to 3 units in time so the quarterly bearish reversal had 1 to 3 quarters before time was up.

Armstrong wrote on his private blog on the first of March our quarterly level of the model generated a bullish reversal at the end of the year reversing its short position and going long. This also signaled that gold would rally from the $1060 area and should test the next bullish reversal at the $1347 level."

Not sure if you are aware or not but you are losing this discussion.

Here we go. You are providing the proof of my assertion yourself!

Hindsight, Fraud. This hindsight message is fraudulent misrepresentation of performance, pure fraud!
Now here you are saying, and I know you are speaking for Martin Armstrong, that


Martin Armstrong had this information, this bullish signal, the fact that his model went long - at the end of the year - but at the same time failed to tell his clients?

In fact he sent the opposite signal to his clients at the time!

If he knew this at the time when he claimed the system went long, and let's assume for the sake of argument that what you say is true then he could have been trading against his clients because he published this signal only three months later.

You are not worth the respect of a single honest being on earth! You are a fraud!


And yes, I have all the reports. How could I otherwise quote them? I have everything!

More importantly, all other people who lost, they have everything as well.



Here is a detailed time line of the events:


Quarterly Superposition Event in Gold 2015


Martin Armstrong is a charlatan, and he spent 11 years in jail for a reason.

Read this blog starting here to find out more about computerized fraud.


See armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog

[Gumbi]

AnonymousCoder

The final nail in the coffin…

In gold at the end of 2015 we did not elect a yearly sell signal which stood at 1044.50.  We also held two key weekly bearish reversals which you are also ignoring completely at 1042 and 1026 these weekly bearish reversals were providing the key support before the break of $1000.

Gold – Update
Posted Dec 25, 2015 by Martin Armstrong
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/gold/gold-the-update/
"Gold for year-end has a number of 1044.50 if we close BELOW this next Wednesday on December 31. If we close ABOVE this number, it will not provide a buy signal nor will it avoid a sell signal."

Gold – It Ain’t Over Until the Fat Lady Sings
Posted Jul 23, 2015 by Martin Armstrong
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/gold/gold-it-aint-over-until-the-fat-lady-sings/
" The key Weekly Bearish Reversals are 1084 and 1075, followed by 1042 and 1026. We have four Weekly Bearish Reversals providing support before the break at $1,000."

Gold – in the Wake of Paris
Posted Nov 16, 2015 by Martin Armstrong
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/gold/gold-in-the-wake-of-paris/
"It is between 1026 and a small gap down to 983, followed by 934 and 885. The horizontal lines are the reversals – red for bearish and green for bullish. There are clusters forming above (resistance) and below (support)."

So who in their right mind would short gold at the end of 2015 with all this information? Ultimately you have failed to understand the reversal system it was your mistake and others to short at the end of 2015. What appears obvious to Armstrong is clearly not the case to everyone else.

You "seem" to be well versed in one trade do you not have any others to share? Or is that it because all the evidence points to you being wrong on this one… You are just a disgruntled 2015 gold report owner who got burned because you failed to see we never actually elected a yearly sell signal at the end of 2015 and we failed to elect two key weekly bearish reversals which were posted well in advance.

Regarding the book try reading the table of contents… and it sold out in less than 3 hours
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/products_services/manipulating-the-world-economy/
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/products_services/products/amazon-did-sell-out-in-less-than-3-hours/

[AnonymousCoder]

AnonymousCoder

The final nail in the coffin?

In gold at the end of 2015 we did not elect a yearly sell signal which stood at 1044.50. We also held two key weekly bearish reversals which you are also ignoring completely at 1042 and 1026 these weekly bearish reversals were providing the key support before the break of $1000.

Gold - Update
Posted Dec 25, 2015 by Martin Armstrong
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/gold/gold-the-update/
"Gold for year-end has a number of 1044.50 if we close BELOW this next Wednesday on December 31. If we close ABOVE this number, it will not provide a buy signal nor will it avoid a sell signal."

Gold - It Ain't Over Until the Fat Lady Sings
Posted Jul 23, 2015 by Martin Armstrong
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/gold/gold-it-aint-over-until-the-fat-lady-sings/
" The key Weekly Bearish Reversals are 1084 and 1075, followed by 1042 and 1026. We have four Weekly Bearish Reversals providing support before the break at $1,000."

Gold - in the Wake of Paris
Posted Nov 16, 2015 by Martin Armstrong
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/gold/gold-in-the-wake-of-paris/
"It is between 1026 and a small gap down to 983, followed by 934 and 885. The horizontal lines are the reversals - red for bearish and green for bullish. There are clusters forming above (resistance) and below (support)."

So who in their right mind would short gold at the end of 2015 with all this information? Ultimately you have failed to understand the reversal system it was your mistake and others to short at the end of 2015. What appears obvious to Armstrong is clearly not the case to everyone else.

You "seem" to be well versed in one trade do you not have any others to share? Or is that it because all the evidence points to you being wrong on this one? You are just a disgruntled 2015 gold report owner who got burned because you failed to see we never actually elected a yearly sell signal at the end of 2015 and we failed to elect two key weekly bearish reversals which were posted well in advance.

Regarding the book try reading the table of contents? and it sold out in less than 3 hours
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/products_services/manipulating-the-world-economy/
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/products_services/products/amazon-did-sell-out-in-less-than-3-hours/

Thank you Gumbi. I could not find a better way to prove what I am trying to lay out here in this forum as you just did for me in an unquestionably valid way.

You are absolutely perfectly demonstrating to all of us the deviousness of your approach, the built-in ambiguity of the reversal system, the computerized fraud that I am referring to - which is:

You are listing a cherry-picked subset of those ambiguous conflicting signals (actually non-signals in this case) that are always generated, that you would normally search and quote in hindsight to argue your case in your attempt to make others look stupid.

More importantly, this is once again a fraudulent misrepresentation of the performance of the system, which you are claiming to have performed as expected while in fact the system failed.


In this case, you are quoting:

1) A not-elected yearly reversal - a non-signal:

In gold at the end of 2015 we did not elect a yearly sell signal which stood at 1044.50.

2) Another reference to that same not-elected yearly reversal:

Gold for year-end has a number of 1044.50 if we close BELOW this next Wednesday on December 31. If we close ABOVE this number, it will not provide a buy signal nor will it avoid a sell signal.

3) Two not-elected weekly reversals - non-signals:

We also held two key weekly bearish reversals which you are also ignoring completely at 1042 and 1026 these weekly bearish reversals were providing the key support before the break of $1000.

4) More technical description of the same weekly non-elected reversals (non-signals):

It is between 1026 and a small gap down to 983, followed by 934 and 885. The horizontal lines are the reversals - red for bearish and green for bullish. There are clusters forming above (resistance) and below (support).

So you think that you can convince any rational observer with that noise, convince them that this noise is valid to overpower and negate / invalidate the only thing that really mattered, a signal that was indeed elected, a quarterly bearish reversal?

So you are saying here in public, that any number of non-elected reversals can negate a major elected reversal of higher significance!

You are saying that this reversal system is absolutely worthless because any elected reversal is subject to so many potentially negating conditions that nobody considering them should ever have any confidence trading based on an elected reversal.

Thank you!

 


Here is a detailed time line of the events:


Quarterly Superposition Event in Gold 2015



Martin Armstrong is a charlatan, and he spent 11 years in jail for a reason.

Read this blog starting here to find out more about computerized fraud.


See armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog.