Member Info for Stupmy

I think that's right Trouts and a similar thought crossed my mind. However, if you want to make real money from the markets, you have to be able to deal with large bets, drawdowns, profits (not taking them too quickly) etc. I think that's where you could perhaps differentiate from TA (what's happening with others) from psychology (what you have to deal with to make money from what's happening with others).

SG fundamentals, just like TA is just a way moving towards a form of rational decision making. The markets aren't random and neither should you be if you want to make money. When you say that they over/undervalue, I personally would jetison thoughts like that as they're based on an incomplete understanding of the information available and there's a lot of information that won't be available to you. So, you can't tell if it's over or undervalued. You can guess based on a rationale. But if you can find ways to figure out what is more or less likely, you can avoid some losses and very often improve profits. Whatever you use (even Voodoo), you won't be able to see into the future.

You mention levels, supports, resistances. In my view they are very important to help you understand where other market participants will be looking to buy and sell.

SG, what you say about learning about TA to overlay on your fundamental knowledge is very important in my view. Mostly you should have a basis in fundamentals, 2ndarily you can use TA etc to help you enter where value is likely to present itself due to market forces.

Take a look at some of the videos from Anton Kreil and his Institue of Trading. He covers the importance of the fundamentals and rates TA as something like (from memory) 20% of what's needed for trading/investing,.

SG, there are a lot of great resources out there for free. My advice is to not pay for anything until you've exhausted the free stuff (that should be never). Also, you have to find a way to do things that suits you. What works for me might be terrible for you.

Here's a couple of links, happy to talk anytime. You'll find people who say it's nonsense and others that swear by it. You have to find out how it suits you. A book I read early on was 'Come Into My Trading Room' by Alexander Elder. Very accessible, not too complex, common sense. I learned a lot over the years, but only a few principles really.

Try Youtube

TheTechnicalTraders

UKSpreadbetting

TheSecretMindset

OK, sorry. Easily confused on the financials. I thought I'd read that. Sometimes makes my head spin to be honest. Maybe that's why the technicals suit me better; small brain.

What I'm finding interesting is that 400m was the previous figure that 'we' (at the time I was part of 'we') viewed as likely to be set aside and probably adequate/more than adequate. Now I see on todays discussion someone looking for part of the 165m that has been set-aside, to be returned after dealing with the claims. And of course the spectre of worse than 400m is still a possiblity. I was surprised that only 165m was set aside, I'm guessing that the market was pleasantly surprised and this led to the move up in the SP. Again, guessing but if Reeves is now not able to influence the discussions in favour of CBG, the market is marking CBG back down to a level where it might expect 400m to be quite possible (as before Reeve's involvement). But what really interests me is the swings in the mood of the board and I think that is what is used by algo's/significant players, to create liquidity (scare PI's!!). It is a great, great business (particulary when the market isn't pulling your pants down in readiness for a jolly good spanking).

Broom, if you think about, with volume 'moderate' shall we say, if as at least one poster suggested, it's a bit tricky buying shares, that could be consistent i.e. plenty holding now, not too many selling but some buyers out there. That could give the price rise without a big change in volume I guess. All a bit 'curve fitting' though. Fun to try to understand, when you don't really!!

Am I your little hairy friend NM? You're not far off the mark. Had I been born french and few years ago, they'd have classed me as one of the 'poilu'!

Here, to back up the statement that volume is 'in-line' with vol since March 3rd and therefore relatively moderate, it's huge compared to what I like to think of as a 'Coldspy volume surge', named after the inventor.

https://screenrec.com/share/85ilLaSvBy

Not really NM, the last hour has higher volume than the hour before, but it's very much in line with what we've had since March 3rd. What I can say is that even though you could call it moderate compared to volume since March 3rd (15 min periods), it's very high compared to the 'Volume Surge' called by Coldspy

I like that idea Bear, heard it from you first.

For goodness sake knot, you're interesting when you stick to what you know, but the munch munch popcorn sh it makes you sound like a little girl, please, please knock it off.

Exactly as LW said, the gap fill, it's around 247. Sounds trite, but the SP has headwinds. The SH's will be easily pushed around, I think the SP will fall to 247 or below. I didn't expect the reaction to be so quick this morning, but the scale of the drop makes it even more likely we'll see 247 or below. The top of that gap is around 267. There is often a bounce as buyers try to prevent the gap fill. I am watching for a very small punt on a bounce at around that level.

Really? So she can no longer influence the proceedings? Thanks schwee. Been so stressed elsewhere I've not followed this closely. Just watching the price. What I do remember is that CBG set aside something like 200m for the claims, which was a lot less than the 400m expected. Was that before Reeves was 'neutered'?

I did Kev, twice. The first drop and the 2nd and now I'm waiting for a fall back.

I'd be surprised if todays results give a push up to the SP. I'm on the sidelines and have been for a little while. You'll all laugh at me, but I'm hoping to buy at 247 or lower. Not sure what will bring this off, but a change to what's needed for the motor insurance claims would certainly be enough. I've not followed in detail recently, but Reeves was going to involve hereself to try to limit the damage. I guess I'll have to catch up on where that is.

I have to say that this comment from Ophidian "Reverse H&S forming - visit 39/40 again then nice move up coming" made no sense at all to me.

Yes I didn't understand either Denzil, any chance of a clarification?

I have outstanding shorts at 6.5% on Shorttracker. What makes you say they clearing out?

Here you go. Took a lot of registering, but here it is word for word from 'theRealSpy'

"Wood Group plc - strong rumours suggesting a bid from Sidara of £1bln+ valuing the business at £1.45 per share - price up 5%+ with 1 week until put up/shut up moment!"

That is becoming a very worrying trend in fact Stille, not just the WTO. Ask yourself, what happens when you've so much money that nothing you can buy is interesting in material terms. What then? Well, then you buy politics. It's why nothing really works anymore.

Anyway, I didn't come here for this. Just read that Trump is threatening to ban people from 43 countries travelling to the US. I guess not direct hit to EZJ, but the sector might wobble if he continues along these lines. There's nothing good that will come from all of this, I'm meaning in a general sense rather than SP movements.