Pathetic and charlatans

Anyone reading EWT and Prechter and Hochberg?

Prechter hides behind one good commodity (but impossible to use ) call 13 years ago or so in 2008, and now makes another shoot for the moon commodity call many years out. So you’ll never know if he was correct, but you will need to trade many times before then. So he doesn’t matter.

Useless.

Hochberg, who has fought (stupidly) an extremely powerful bull market in stocks for 13 months, wait, for 13 years, wait...even longer than that, now points out (to distract us from the thousand ‘top’ calls for the SP?) that Tesla and Viacom had recent dramatic declines.

Yes, Tesla after climbing ~500% fell by 40%. Sure Hochberg, sure, you are quite brilliant at your job.

Like Nostradamus.

Don’t expect to see from either of them the difficult part of any market analysis: where and when and what to buy / sell, and the stop and exit points. They provide none of that. They are delusional or possibly charlatans.

Is the lesson that Elliott wave principle as a market approach is gobbledygook or is the lesson that Prechter and Hochberg just are terrible at it?

1 member likes this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Steven Vincent on April 1, 2021 at 5:00pm

I think I make really good use out of Elliott Wave because I use it as part of a total package and I use it objectively. Prechter makes his rules into holy scripture that can never be questioned. A good analyst will always maintain a flexible mind.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John on April 1, 2021 at 10:15pm

Ok, so you think EW is a useful approach.

I respect that approach and the way you describe it.

Holy scripture sure is hard to argue with.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steven Vincent on April 1, 2021 at 10:24pm

Thank you sir

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John on April 2, 2021 at 4:52pm

I was also thinking, apart from their EW analysis (or bastardized version of it), they commit other trading large mistakes. They consistently fail to place stop points. They mainly rely on only one analytic area, sentiment. Which 1-they have been ahistorical in its usage, and 2-overly focused on it. The possibility their view could be wrong is not seriously considered except to say, essentially, if we haven’t seen the top it’s just around the corner.