Bob,Originally Posted by EB
The NASDAQ did not create a more formal system with weightings and higher timeframes.
In the 1990's, senior mm's did manage the longer (yearly, semester, quarterly) timeframes positions and that's where the bulk of the profits originated from. Every new week and month they would charge their "mature" subordinates with the weekly and monthly sizing in and out volumes.
So, mature mm's were managing the weekly and monthly timeframes. Each day they would distribute the planned sizing-in or out volumes for the day to junior mm's.
So, daily pivots were left over to junior mm's.
The "formal" system with weightings is my own creation, and I've never seen it practiced by anyone else than by those who learned it from me. I also added the 50 dma and 200 dma to the system because these are usually the levels that institutions prefer. Most institutional decision-makers need to be protected by an umbrella to justify their decisions and these moving averges are the ideal visual and psychological umbrellas. My best institutional client was giving me the list of stocks and approximate volume he was interested in, telling me ; "Don't call me unless these stocks come near their 50 dma or 200 dma". He only gave the green light for building a position or making block trades when it was the case. I also created the cluster concept and practice.
John Person is a great guy, but his "multiple timeframes" pivot system he's talking about has nothing in common with mine. He trades each timeframe independently, while I am weighing confluences of market makers and institutional investors interests.
By the way, I've mostly stopped drinking any alcohol now, but at the time he's talking about, my favorite drink was another creation of mine that I named a Red Nose: Gin, Crème de Cassis and Ice Tea. Beware, it's very treacherous!
Billy
Reply With Quote