Forex-random numbers-- Sooner or later "death" will come. The law of nature is this!!! - page 7
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
rider писал (а):
А если попробовать не привязываться к уровням, времени, волнам и т.д - это же всё производные, а рассмотреть такой вариант..... на рынке, судя по всему, есть только одна константа, - количество money, ежедневно, ежечасно, ежеминутно вкладываемых в него, ну.... +- конечно. Все это дело крутится-вертится и торгуется до определенного момента, пока не наступает что-то вроде революционной ситуации: быки\медведи не могут медведи\быки не хотят. Совершенно необязательно, что уровень на котором это произойдет будет максимумом или минимумом, но совершенно обязательно, что после этого с рынком произойдут какие-то изменения.... Так вот, вопрос, собственно, в возможности, без использования индикаторов (стандартных имеется ввиду), уровней и.д., основываясь только на анализе характера предшествующего движения цены, оценить количество вложенных money и вычислить этот момент..... ведь, большевики как-то вычислили? :)
So that's the information the trader doesn't have.
but who has it? that's right the banks the broker withdrew the money to
if we imagine that at the top end the biggest banks have it
they have information about the amount of money
for traders the situation is the same as looking for a black cat in a dark room
Consult, with Ilyich... :)))))))))
What's he got to do with it? :).... you have to ask the people who paid
So that's the information the trader doesn't have.
but who does? right, the banks......
I don't think anyone has such aggregate information....
And it was not a question of a specific amount, but of an assessment: have they run out at the moment or are there still some left :)
A dealer - after receiving a bid from a customer to buy, say, a few million euros
puts it on the interbank - right?
RIGHT .... that means he sends this order up the market
if he does not send it as you say, i.e. keeps it secret,
the euro will continue to rise - and the client decides to close it under certain conditions, the dealer will have to pay a certain amount of profit
- and then the dealer will not be able to show this order to the Bourse - because "as you say, the dealers did not report anything to the exchange.
You already understand that the dealer sent the order higher
which means the place he sent it to KNOWS about this order...
Wrong. A normal brokerage company will only send above the order for difference. I.e., if there is a BUY order for several million EUR over USD, but there are no counter SELL orders, the DC will print the whole order. If there are counter bids, only the Diff order will be output.
A dealer - after receiving a bid from a customer to buy, say, a few million euros
puts it on the interbank - right?
RIGHT .... that means he sends this order up the market
if he does not send it as you say, i.e. keeps it secret,
the euro will continue to rise - and the client decides to close it under certain conditions, the dealer will have to pay a certain amount of profit
- and then the dealer will not be able to show this order to the Bourse - because "as you say, the dealers did not report anything to the exchange.
You already understand that the dealer sent the order higher
which means the place he sent it to KNOWS about the order...
Wrong. A normal brokerage company will send up only the order for difference. I.e., if there is a BUY order for several million EUR over USD, but there are no counter SELL orders, the DC will print the whole order. If there are opposite SELL orders, only the Difference Order will be output.
it is clear... for example on euros from 2006 there is no sense to withdraw them ... they will work out within the brokerage house on the brokerage house profit
i.e. people usually like to go against the upward trend... i'm just kidding, although there is some truth in it
---
Consult, with Illich... :)))))))))
What's he got to do with it? :) .... you have to ask who paid
that's the information the trader doesn't have.
but who does? that's right banks......
i don't think anyone has this kind of aggregate information....
i am not referring to an exact amount but to an estimation: we are out of money or there is still some left :)
As far as aggregate information is concerned.
We need to decide who pays for PROFIT in the market and who takes profit when a trader makes a loss.
we are talking about the amounts traded by the brokerage company i.e. the brokerage company brought them to the market!
let's say a trader took a loss in the euro, DT put a position on the real market, and transferred it up the QUESTION WHERE!
the LOSS triggered - everything is clear with the BC - in this case the BC closed the position and took the trade out of the market... for this amount and debited the trader with the loss
in this case, the CD took a loss, covered the trader's expense and so the trader made a loss!
Who got the profit on the LOS ?
what happens next ?
---
why do not you think that there is a group of very large banks that ... that is the Tip of the iceberg
they can always reach an agreement to go to the stop with a database of orders of all the large positions that are placed by "players"
who aren't friendly to these banks.
---
there are a lot of examples of collusion
for example in '94 there was a bank collusion (only russian) when the dollar was rising insanely for about a month
and the banks wouldn't let ordinary people buy dollars for a long time - about a couple of weeks
and on "Black Tuesday" they started selling the quid
and on that day, everyone knows that the dollar fell sharply and then dropped to about 15 rubles and peaked at 28p
a lot of people bought quid that day at the peak.
late September 1994
98 August, similarly
it's a simple and primitive trick
what prevents big banks from doing the same in forex ?
probably everyone has heard of KC
We are talking about the sums of money which were withdrawn by the CD, i.e. the CD has nothing to do with.......
We are talking about money supply, the volume of which remains more or less constant on a certain market, for a certain instrument (or group of instruments) due to conservative habits and principles of players (to put it simply: search for something good). Nothing comes from nowhere and nothing goes to nowhere. If someone bought it, someone sold it; if someone lost it, someone gained it. The point is that this mass is in constant motion, flowing from poachers to sellers and back again - sometimes quickly, sometimes slowly. And, the question is, can price movement analysis (simple, complex, whatever....) determine a certain moment of equilibrium, after which it will either continue moving or turn around......
There is one ratio: the ratio of the sum of price increments along the trend to the sum against the trend rotates around 1.1-1.2 (it was calculated using the minutes) .... who's bigger? :)
I mean, maybe someone did some digging in this direction.
наверно все слышали про КЦ
We know, we know, Yura. I have similar thoughts myself. I'm not a big believer in conspiracy theory, but there must be something true about the MF's teachings - otherwise the quotes would not have been so consistent (but I have never been able to decipher Axel's ciphers). And those Russian banks must have been bought by that iceberg too. Who was in power back then? The "Chicago boys"...
I'm sure everyone's heard of KC.
We know, we know, Yura. I have similar thoughts myself. I'm not a big supporter of conspiracy theory, but there must be something true in the MF's teachings - otherwise the quotes wouldn't have been so consistent (but I couldn't decipher Axel's cipher). And those Russian banks must have been bought by that iceberg too. Who was in power back then? The "Chicago boys"...
Alexei
But I do not accept literally everything they say there,
in fact! personally i don't really believe that anyone is peddling currency at will ...
I've written about it more than once in the MF forum
---
i don't believe in aksel's cipher theory ...
and his levels are really well predicted by him as an analyst
---
Russian banks - nah, well here :-) not Chicago ...
I was just giving an example - when actions are aligned
---
no one can clearly explain whythe quotes move.
So there's speculation.
It's understandable, Yura, it's just that I've had that phase. But about Axel... He's very curious sometimes: Pivot point rarely, but it happens that it crawls out of Support I/Resistance I limits. Anyway, no formula I know of allows that. Or it simply means that by the time his forecast was published Axel saw that some of these borders had been broken (the standard formulas should apply to one point in time, not to different ones).
And in general, I compared his forecasts with those of Saxo, for example, and did not see much difference.