Tuesday, September 13, 2011

The maniacal bounce in the final hour from yesterday's lows is robustly impulsive on the hourly chart, warning shorts not to get too complacent, even if you entered well above these levels.  For trading purposes I'll suggest using a camouflage buy-stop at the conventional entry spot shown hypothetically in the chart. (In that regard, please note that it will take a relatively hefty pullback to bring this vehicle into the retracement window.)  Finally, I'll mention that the very bearish target given here earlier at 954.00 is still valid -- not to mention, a good reason to try and lay out some shorts near its midpoint sibling, 1088.75.  That is logically a good minimum upside target for this short squeeze.

Yesterday's 'buy' recommendation at 738.25 missed catching the low of a so-far $2750 bounce by just two ticks ($62.50), giving us even more incentive to keep trying.  This vehicle may prove a little too cagey for entry tactics such as I'm able to disseminate the night before, and I would therefore encourage you to trade my numbers imaginatively and aggressively, putting your own savvy to work. For now, I'll suggest using the 'd' targets of retracement patterns such as the one shown to bottom-fish.  Note that this is a one-minute chart I'm using, since we may need that level of subtlety to avoid swimming with the sharks who feed on this vehicle. ______ UPDATE (8:08 p.m. EDT): An alert Pivoteer in the chat room noticed that the intraday low occurred precisely at the midpoint support of an obvious pattern on the intraday charts.   Perhaps this vehicle isn't as treacherous as I had originally thought when we began monitoring it closely for the first time a couple of weeks ago.

Yesterday's plunge exceeded my 39.850 target by a dime -- probably not enough for us to infer that more weakness is imminent. Even so, I'll stipulate that December Silver push today above the two 'external' peaks shown before we break out the bubbly. Shortly before 10:30 p.m. EDT, the bounce from Monday's lows looked capable of reaching 41.625.  Any higher would of course be an encouraging sign, but first we'll need to see a breakout above the 41.075 midpoint resistance associated with that number. Camouflageurs should notice on the 5-minute chart that a print at that number would create a bullish impulse leg by exceeding an external peak at 40.995 made Monday on the way down.

Although yesterday's analysis correctly called the downtrend and missed the low of a nearly $60 selloff by just $4, that wasn't quite close enough to harness this beast easily when it made the turn.  We watched the rebound in real time during an impromptu trading session attended by more than 100. However, when we applied some finely nuanced camouflage to the task of getting long, success proved tricky, and we were unable to board at the low. Late Monday night, the bounce looked capable of hitting 1841.40 over the near term (3m, A=1813.00 on 9/12, B=1831.20), but any higher would renew the bull cycle. However, the bearish, 1771.50 target given here yesterday will remain in force until such time as 1889.10 has been exceeded to the upside. Moreover, the struggle the futures appeared to be having moving above that number's sibling midpoint at 1830.30 tends to confirm and corroborate 1771.50 as a retracement objective.  Want to learn how to nail swing highs and lows precisely, and to manage trade risk yourself? Click here for information about the upcoming Hidden Pivot Webinar on October 5-6 and a $50 discount.

If you thought Obama’s vote-buying “jobs” scheme was political bilge when he announced it last week, the plan sounds even less appealing now that we know how he'd like to pay for it.  For starters, in search of revenues, the president has returned yet again to his cherished notion that anyone making more than $200,000 is “rich” – i.e., in the same category as leftist envy-mongers put hedge fund managers and Big Oil.  Reportedly, tax breaks for all who fall in those categories, and in many others from which the government is already extracting more than 90% of its revenues, would be eliminated in order to offset Obamajobs’ supposed $467 billion cost.  Is it possible that when the President went to war with Republicans earlier this summer over raising the debt limit, he completely missed the main point of the discussion – i.e., that new taxes were off the table?  Op-ed supporters will undoubtedly claim there are no new taxes involved in the jobs proposal, only the elimination of existing tax breaks.  This is an argument we thought Obama lost when he tried to hike taxes to pre-Bush II levels a while ago.  Say this for the guy:  Like the die-hard disciple of hard-left rabble-rouser Saul Alinsky that he is, Barack Obama never gives up. We should have realized as much when he rammed health care legislation down our throats even though most Americans indicated they strongly opposed – still oppose – it. Concerning the jobs scheme, who could possibly believe that the $467 billion would be well spent?  Outside the Keynesian lunatic fringe championed by Paul Krugman, we read mainly about the epic sums expended on each new job associated with Federal handouts.  At best, these jobs routinely seem to cost taxpayers many hundreds of thousands of dollars apiece, especially