Jeff Tan (jefftan) has published a very nice pitchfork-based analysis of Facebook over the last few months: tradingview.com/v/p4thblgM/
I'd like to complement this with an view based purely on ABCD formations. FB made two ABCDs (abcd1 & abcd2; narrow red lines indicate ab and cd). abcd1 featured a ~23.6% corrections. In abcd2 the correction was ~34%.
The latest correction to a low of $45.53 is way too large to 'fit into' an ABCD based on the upleg in the last two weeks of Sept. (see abcd3??)
So, reluctant as I am to contemplate that FB is going higher, it looks like it's in the throes of a mothership ABCD pattern (heavy red): the correction fits perfectly (see big pale candystriped Fib box, especially the dotted red line).
The d of abcd3 ($54.82) is likely to provide some resistance; if we're already there that would imply retracing to find a 'c' somewhere in the orange box. Hence: short - but only in the very near term, and after signs of a top.
If FB then takes out that top, the mothership's P & D - $58.96 & $72.59 respectively - will be calling, and would be places to expect turning points. (And short the **** out of this blight upon humanity :)
Anyway, I'm just making this stuff up ;) Good luck!
He mentions "$54 and change", so I've double checked my chart, and in fact had a couple of points slightly off (just because I hadn't zoomed in). With the pivots accurately located I get $54.32, which is consistent, considering BATS isn't a consolidated datafeed, and might be off a bit at times:
(I'm not currently a subscriber of his; I believe I've picked up the essentials of his method via lengthy and close study of the relevant publicly available materials, so it was reassuring to hear this. I plan to subscribe soon.)
cryptoyoda
⋅
(He didn't make a consolidation zone call AFAIK; that's just based on observation of the last couple of corrections, and nothing to do with RAs methods. See said I was making stuff up :p )
cryptoyoda
⋅
In 'the zone'. Now FB gives us a very nice clue about a likely turning point: an ABCD with an abcd in the CD leg. D= 54.42, d=54.41. BUY @ 54.43 SL 54.18 max RRR 3.5. Possible profit taking at marked resistance (red dotted lines).
cryptoyoda
⋅
Gapped down on open, & look where it bounced:
Got a buy stop in at 51.84, stop loss (sell stop) 51.36. (Paper tradin' & it took me a while to figure out how to enter that order combination :p)
Wonder if it might not turn down if it touches that level again; it's made lower highs since crossing it. :s
cryptoyoda
⋅
I guess a long straddle (or similar) could be a nice way to play this, if not too pricey. Still don't have much clue about options though :p
cryptoyoda
⋅
Got lucky again - target: 53.26 (also visible in snapshot above) high this AM: 53.24
Looks like 52.75 is offering resistance, & FB's closed above the prior spike high for a couple of 15 min bars. I'd guess there's a good chance of follow-through to 54 "and change"..
cryptoyoda
⋅
Looks like C came in a lot lower :p But FB may be breaking out of it's CD leg (much of which was in a tight channel*):
D= 53.69 here we come?
*Note the previous C was followed by a channel breakout on low volumes too...
cryptoyoda
⋅
Maybe it'll be a replay of yesterday: bounce around in an upchannel (red bold) all afternoon, then take FB up like a rocket on the open when no one else is awake enough to get onboard:
cryptoyoda
⋅
Game over!
I misidentified the trend; it was a mistake to base it on the movement yesterday. The wide-range up-bar that flushed above the less steep channel (non-bold red) was a Wyckoffian 'upthrust'. Smart money (hence the relatively large volumes) sucking in longs. The lack of volume in the following three bars indicates lack of interest in buying from smart money. Just selling what they could without depressing the price...
kereport.com/2013/10/21/rick-ackerman-technicals-2/
He mentions "$54 and change", so I've double checked my chart, and in fact had a couple of points slightly off (just because I hadn't zoomed in). With the pivots accurately located I get $54.32, which is consistent, considering BATS isn't a consolidated datafeed, and might be off a bit at times:
(I'm not currently a subscriber of his; I believe I've picked up the essentials of his method via lengthy and close study of the relevant publicly available materials, so it was reassuring to hear this. I plan to subscribe soon.)