I'd like to ask the Pro Armstrongers a few serious questions.
For the rest of you, I know your thoughts about the following so please give Over45, Truth777 and the rest a chance to respond. Thanks
According to various people, Mr Armstrong included, he has a computer named Socrates that can predict market, economy and other changes to the day. If this is so, why at the end of 2015 into Jan./Feb. 2016, did he write at least 3 public blog posts saying that gold would go under $1000.00, while during the time of at least the 3rd one of those blog posts, and after, gold climbed up into June?
Why did he wait until June to say, 'see I told you' and referenced a one sentence item stuffed in among the several paragraphs in the first 'gold under 1000' post, (that may have been there originally, assuming he did not add that at a later time), saying that if gold closed over such and such a number, (which it did at some point), it would be bullish?
If that bullish scenario was in fact coming true, why did he not give his many readers on the public blog, the same ones that he was telling in at least 3 public blog posts that gold was going under 1000, an early heads up and say, 'hey, it's bullish now' , instead of waiting 6 months to point it out after the fact?
These are serious questions and I would like a serious answer if possible please.
Thanks
Angus_P
Ok, I did research on MA's blog from that time, and I would pull out his following two posts. First is from Dec 25, 2015, where he writes:
"Therefore, a closing ABOVE 1044.50 for 2015 implies that this is not sufficiently weak enough just yet.
This can mean only that 2016 will produce the lowest closing and 2017 will produce the intraday low."
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/gold/gold-the-update/And this one from Feb 11, 2016:
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/gold/gold-the-february-crisis-the-prelude-to-chaos/He writes: "The low came on the first benchmark right on target at 1045 ($1 from our number at 1044) and was 51.6 months from the 2011 high.
The year-end closing ABOVE 1044 warned that gold was “not as weak as it may appear.”"
He is spot on the number (first sentence from the Dec 25 post), but his interpretation in the second sentence is not correct. He said it many times, he is human as well, and as such, his interpretations are not always correct. Anyone with the real trading experience, understands what MA is saying here.
But the numbers are there, and they were correct. MA himself like every other trader has found in a situations where his human emotions are telling him one thing, but the computer is telling other thing.
And, in such battles computer always wins over MA.
Above is what I found, but what I can tell myself, is that MA was spot on, both the number, and his interpretation, on the Monthly Bullish Reversal, I think it was 1362.
I didn't listen, again human emotion, and I blame myself for that, not someone else. Because once that number (which was out for years, provided by MA) was taken out, after 3 years of ranging, Gold took off.
That would have been very lucrative trade.