Copycat

Great post. Although I disagree with your conclusions. The change in the demand- or/and supply curve means a change in equilibruim. In a new equilibrium, there will be a new general price level or new general level of volume, or both (to keep things vague :p) IMO. I think prices do not jump exactly from equilibrium to equilibrium, but gradually moving to new equilibria, or towards equilibrium. A price discovering proces. To illustrate with a snapshot in time: Suppose price is at P1 for some reason. Suppliers are offering Q1 at this level. Buyers want Q2 at this level. This agreement is visible for al to see. Price P1 with Q1 volume (volume is matched quantity/ quantity exchanged. The pressure is upwards, since more quantities are wanted then offered, but you do not know this with this single transaction. But if you move this trough continous time, prices will move up and down around equilibrium. And this is where most of the trades are taking place. So the next moment you see a decrease in P with with shrinking volume, and afterwards an increase in price with bigger volume. You don't need to be a genius to figure out the momentary pressure is upwards. A further increase of price and volume confirms all this. Until prices are above equilibrium, where see a shrinking of volume/ drying up with increasing prices, since more quatities are being offered then wanted. Selling pressure could be bigger then buying pressure and prices are moving down again. This with changes in demand/ supply as you described, more combinations of volume and price are possible. But yeah, I still haven't touched any financial contracts yet and this is just way to theoratical. Just the thoughts of someone with way to much time on his hands, so don't take this to heart.

Anyone willing to help me anwering these 2 questions? In Comparing Strength and Weakness (sect. 8M) Wyckoff wrote: "The fact that an individual stock may be moving against the trend of its group does not destroy nor impair the value or effectiveness of the indications given by the Average in which it is included. On the contrary, such action, of itself, frequently conveys significant information which should not be ignored with respect to the behavior and position of that stock." I can't figure out what kind of siginificant information it conveys. Isn't this the same as: Market (averages) weak - stock strong = market trending down - stock trending up. So buying would be better? My other question. Should the effect of news be taken into account in your analysis? For example: If a stock is not reacting bullish to bullish news, could this be indicating weakness? More combinations possible. Ugh, wrong thread. Could this be moved to the: Ask any Wyckoff related questions thread?

Some serious speculation going on here: Daily Kos: State of the Nation Summary: Goldman Sachs may just possibly have used security access codes and built a system to acquire trading information PRIOR to transaction_commit time points at NYSE. The profitability of this split-second information advantage would have been and could have been extraordinary. Observed yielding profits at $100,000,000 a day. But I'm a layman, can't verify anything of it.

@Motorway Why are there only whole numbers for price in an a wave chart? This way only waves made by whole numbers are visible. Units of price is 1. So for example: 44, 45, 46. There should be less waves if the units are bigger then 1 (44, 46, 48) and more waves if the units are smaller then 1. Theoretically it can be even made continuous. Does this al even matter? My ohter question is regarding the time frame. There is still one time frame when using P&F. The starting point and ending. Where do you need to start? Is there a special reason to choose a particular starting point? Or should i just shut up and read at least something about P&F before asking silly questions? :p I apologize for the bad English.

Hi, What will I have to do if I want to speculate (on large swings) with European stocks? Can leaders be found in Europe? Or are leaders American stocks exclusively? Is an European Index good enough as a proxy for a general market trend? I guess the term leader is kind of unclear to me. I heard someone saying that European stocks are lagging behind American stock. With this in mind, focusing on American stocks would be better. I love this Wyckoff section btw. (enough buttkissing :p)