Are there any wave traders here? - page 16
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
Fibonacci numbers are not mysticism, but the universal code of the universe.
....
And about the competitive market:
.
and it works(!!!), as confirmed by numerous studies.
ps.
Let me be clear: I am not a supporter of Eliot's theory.
Oleg, the conditions of deriving the maximum profit, the existence of 2 break-even points on the competitive market, the average market price, the optimal selling price that ensures maximum profit and many other prices, 17 types of prices in total that exist on the market, their interrelation and regularities of formation not only on the competitive market, but also on the perfect and monopolistic markets, are shown and proved by me athttps://www.mql5.com/ru/articles/1825. There is no "golden ratio" there, which means that this notion is alien to the market. Everything is much more complicated and harmonious. There cannot be any other description of price interaction in the market. And you cited Figure 3 on the "necessary condition for the stability of the price structure in a competitive market" is a hollow assertion and has nothing to do with the market and you also fell for the bait, saying that "it works (!!!), as evidenced by numerous studies". Confirmed by what and where? Incorrect claims cannot be confirmed by definition.
Oleg, the conditions of maximum profit, the existence of 2 break-even points on the competitive market, the average market price, the optimal selling price for goods ensuring maximum profit and many other prices, 17 types of prices in total, their interrelation, the laws of formation not only on the competitive market, but also on the perfect and monopolistic markets are shown and proved by me inhttps://www.mql5.com/ru/articles/1825. There is no "golden ratio" there, which means that this notion is alien to the market. Everything is much more complicated and harmonious. There cannot be any other description of price interaction in the market. And you cited Figure 3 on the "necessary condition for the stability of the price structure in a competitive market" is a hollow assertion and has nothing to do with the market and you also fell for the bait, saying that "it works (!!!), as evidenced by numerous studies". Confirmed by what and where? Incorrect claims cannot have confirmation by definition.
You are drawing the wrong conclusion. It only follows from the fact that"No golden ratio is there" (i.e. not in your theory) that this concept is foreign to your theory, and not to the market as such (don't identify your theory with the market). And this is because you, when constructing your theory, were initially negative about the "golden ratio" as a kind of mysticism. Try to reconstruct the theory in the "golden ratio" metric and it will only benefit from that.
Manifestations of the golden ratio are ubiquitous in nature; this is a fact and should not be overlooked. The market is a part of nature, but a part that has not yet been revealed.
Oleg, the conditions of maximum profit, the existence of 2 break-even points on the competitive market, the average market price, the optimal selling price for goods ensuring maximum profit and many other prices, 17 types of prices in total, their interrelation, the regularity of formation not only on the competitive market, but also on the perfect and monopolistic markets are shown and proved by me inhttps://www.mql5.com/ru/articles/1825. There is no "golden ratio" there, which means that this notion is alien to the market. Everything is much more complicated and harmonious. There cannot be any other description of price interaction in the market. And you cited Figure 3 on the "necessary condition for the stability of the price structure in a competitive market" is a hollow assertion and has nothing to do with the market and you also fell for the bait, saying that "it works (!!!), as evidenced by numerous studies". Confirmed by what and where? Incorrect claims cannot have confirmation by definition.
Yusuf, do you agree with the view that "there is nothing more practical than a good theory"?
How do you feel about the practical side of your theory(s)? Judging by your categorical nature, things are going better than ever?
Yusuf, do you agree with the view that "there is nothing more practical than good theory"?
How are you with the practical side of your theory(s)? Judging by your categorical nature - things are going better than ever?
1. 1. I agree. But unfortunately, others do not agree with me.
2.. Yes, things are going better than I expected, but, on the cent plane. The 3 theories themselves don't fail me.
3. Who will create the 4th theory? Who can battle with me?
1. I agree. But unfortunately, others disagree with me.
2.. Yes, things are going better than expected, but, on the penny plane. The 3 theories themselves don't fail me.
3. Who will create the 4th theory? Who can fight me?
AUD - in correction, options under consideration are a) shallow correction, triple Z-sig ( orange marking ) 3-3-3-3 - and continuation upwards ? b) deep in potential development ( light marking ) 5-3-5.
and it works(!!!), as confirmed by numerous studies.
1. I agree. But unfortunately, others disagree with me.
2.. Yes, things are going better than expected, but, on the penny plane. The 3 theories themselves don't fail me.
3. Who will create the 4th theory? Who can fight me?