All Majors and Gold

I think good place for place shorts and hold

update....drop?

cypher?

It actually looks more like a really huge AB=CD

if so target will be 1392 not 1356

Interesting reading.............

Deutsche Bank's Shocking Admission: "QE In Europe Will Be Ineffective"
http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau.../picture-5.jpg
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 10/07/2014 13:51 -0400

Via Deutsche Bank's George Saravelos,
Euroglut: a new phase of global imbalances
This report argues that both “secular stagnation” and “normalization” are incomplete frameworks for understanding the post-crisis world. Instead, “Euroglut” – the global imbalance created by Europe’s massive current account surplus will be the defining variable for the rest of this decade. Euroglut implies three things: a significantly weaker euro (we forecast 0.95 in EUR/USD by end-2017), low long-end yields and exceptionally flat global yield curves, and ongoing inflows into “good” EM assets. In other words, we expect Europe’s huge excess savings combined with aggressive ECB easing to lead to some of the largest capital outflows in the history of financial markets.
Introducing Euroglut
The dust is settling on the Global Financial Crisis, and markets are now focusing on the future. One prominent line of thinking is that the new normal is "secular stagnation" - weak trend growth and very low neutral rates. Another view is that "normalization" is around the corner - growth will soon return, and policy will inevitably normalize faster, particularly in the US. In this piece, we argue that both the "normalization" and "secular stagnation" frameworks are incomplete. Instead, it is Europe's huge savings glut - what we call euroglut - that will drive global trends for the foreseeable future. While euroglut seems similar to "secular stagnation", the asset price conclusions are very different and far more powerful.
What is Euroglut?
Euroglut is a global imbalances problem. It refers to the lack of European domestic demand caused by the Eurozone crisis.
http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau...1007_QE1_0.jpg

The clearest evidence of Euroglut is Europe's high unemployment rate combined with a record current account surplus. Both are a reflection of the same problem: an excess of savings over investment opportunities. Euroglut is special for one and only reason: it is very, very big. At around 400bn USD each year, Europe's current account surplus is bigger than China's in the 2000s.
http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau...1007_QE2_0.jpg

If sustained, it would be the largest surplus ever generated in the history of global financial markets. This matters.
Domestic policy implications
A domestic implication of euroglut is that FX weakening will not be an effective policy response. Does the euro-area need an even bigger trade surplus? Europe faces a problem of domestic, not external demand. The global environment is hardly conducive to export-led growth either. Japan has engineered a close to 50% appreciation in USD/JPY yet exports have failed to recover.1 This lack of FX responsiveness does not mean that the ECB doesn't care. Absent fiscal policy or other "animal spirit"-boosting initiatives, there is very little left for the central bank than to push yields and the currency lower. QE in Europe will be ineffective, but it will happen anyway - it is the only tool the ECB has to protect its mandate.
Global impact
Euroglut means that as the world's biggest savers, Europeans will drive international capital flow trends for the rest of this decade. Europe will become the 21st century's largest capital exporter. This statement is close to an accounting identity - a surplus on the current account implies capital outflows elsewhere. Our premise is that the next few years will mark the beginning of very large European purchases of foreign assets. The ECB plays a fundamental role here: by pushing down real yields and creating a domestic "asset shortage", it is incentivizing European reach for yield abroad. 3 Think about policy over the next few years: at least 500bn-1trio of excess cash will be sitting in European bank accounts "earning" a negative rate of 20bps. In the meantime, asset-purchases will drive yields down across the board – there will be nothing with yield left to buy. The asset implications are huge:
1. Currency weakness. As equity, fixed income and FDI outflows pick up, the euro should face broad-based weakening pressure. Our end-2017 forecast for EUR/USD is 95cents.

2. Very flat fixed income curves. What will Europeans buy? With the US Treasury - bund yield spread at record highs, US fixed income should be a primary beneficiary of European demand. "Secular stagnation" implies a low terminal Fed rate resulting in low long-end yields. "Euroglut" suggests that the level of neutral Fed funds doesn't matter. If there is sufficient demand for longdated instruments, the US 10-yr yield could easily trade below terminal Fed funds. It happened during the 2000s "bond conundrum", it is even more likely now - global imbalances are bigger.

3. Good EM could survive. The Global Financial Crisis has seen a rotation of current account surpluses away from EM to Europe. At face value, this makes EM more vulnerable. But the sum of countries' current account surpluses is larger now than before 2008, so there is more spare capital around. European current account recycling should mean that the marginal demand for EM assets is likely to go up, not down.
Beyond the Eurozone
Just like China's surplus drove most Asia policy in the 2000s, Euroglut will drive policy across Europe. Two economies are already imposing currency floors to fight off euro weakness (Switzerland and Czech Republic) and one more has imposed negative rates (Denmark). Scandinavia, Switzerland and the CE3 economies are likely to face continued pressure to ease more. All these countries are running current account surpluses, meaning the potential for European capital outflows is even larger. We could see an amplification of Euroglut: most of the European continent could end up with negative rates or FX managed-regimes.
Conclusion
"Secular stagnation" and "normalization" rely on views around trend growth but ignore global imbalances. It is these that remain the most important feature of the global financial system. Europe is the new China, and via large demand for foreign assets, it will play a dominant role in driving global asset price trends for the remainder of this decade.
* * *
Ironic that this report should come out alongside the Bundesbank's comments blasting Draghi.

on weekly channel...

Fake or make

And tonight FOMC news @ 8pm CET?

Hi all of you...

This one will definitely wake you up

http://www.nextworldtv.com/videos/en...vironment.html

or leave you even more asleep and unconscious?

Plse pass this one on in your respective networks, whether you laughed or simply sat down and wept out in pure despair of our collective insanity?

http://www.nextworldtv.com/videos/en...vironment.html

Time to wake up? The time is NOW?

See also: http://www.forexfactory.com/showthre...10#post7786710

Guess he was referring to 138.2 to 23.6. No idea. I'm not paying attention to his charts.

decending triangle 1356 to 1000 and 900 target

What happens when 1180 is broken now?
do you have scenerio for that?

gold view
inverse hs completed on h4....target 1258?

this is the after inverse hs scenario

what about ab=cd
a=1345
b=1183
c=1264
d=1082

That would be sweet

Maybe this would be more appealing to your eyes

What would happen to gold prices upon the November 30 Swiss voting

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-1...atriating-gold

The Swiss National Bank has lashed out at the so-called "gold initiative" efforts to "Save Our Swiss Gold" unsurprisingly proclaiming it as a bad idea. As Ron Paul previously noted, "The gold referendum, if it is successful, will be a slap in the face to those elites," and so the full-court press ahead of the Nov 30th vote has begun (a la Scotland fearmongery) as SNB Vice Chairman Jean-Pierre Danthine explains how a 'yes' vote for the initiative "would severely constrain the SNB’s room for manoeuvre in a future crisis," as it "poses danger to the conduct of a successful monetary policy." His reasoning (below) is stunning...
Via Jean-Pierre Danthine, Vice Chair Swiss National Bank
On 30 November, the Swiss electorate will vote on the so-called “gold initiative” (“Save our Swiss gold”, in full), which, paradoxically, would severely constrain the SNB’s room for manoeuvre in a future crisis. Let me digress for a few minutes to explain why the SNB is opposed to this initiative.
The initiative is calling for three things:
first, the SNB should hold at least 20% of its assets in gold;

second, it should no longer be allowed to sell any gold at any time; and

third, all of its gold reserves should be stored in Switzerland.
Let me address the last point first. Today, 70% of our gold reserves are stored in Switzerland, 20% are held at the Bank of England and 10% at the Bank of Canada. As you know, a country’s gold reserves usually have the function of an asset to be used only in emergencies.
For that reason, it makes sense to diversify the storage locations. In addition, it makes sense to choose locations where gold is traded, so that it can be sold faster and at lower transaction costs. The UK and Canada both meet that criterion. In addition, they both have a strong and reliable legal system and we have every assurance that our gold is safe there.
The initiative’s demand to hold at least 20% of our assets in gold would severely restrict the conduct of monetary policy. Monetary policy transactions directly change our balance sheet.
Restrictions on the composition of the balance sheet therefore restrict our monetary policy options. A telling example is our decision to implement the exchange rate floor vis-à-vis the euro that I mentioned above: with the initiative’s legal limitation in place, we would have been forced during our defence of the minimum exchange rate not only to buy euros, but also to buy gold in large quantities. Our defence of the minimum exchange rate would thus have involved huge costs, which would almost certainly have caused foreign exchange markets to doubt our resolve to enforce the rate by all means.
Even worse consequences would result from the initiative’s proposal to prohibit the sale of gold at any time. An increase in gold holdings could not be reversed, even if necessary from a monetary policy perspective. In combination with the obligation to hold at least 20% of total assets in gold, this could gradually lead the SNB into a situation where its assets would mainly consist of gold: each extension of the balance sheet for monetary policy reasons would necessitate gold purchases, but whenever the balance sheet needed to be reduced again for the same reasons, we would not be able to resell our gold holdings. This would severely restrict our room for manoeuvre.
Furthermore, because gold pays no interest or dividends, the SNB’s ability to generate profits and distribute them to the Confederation and the Cantons would be impaired.
As a final point, note that currency reserves which cannot be sold are not truly reserves. It does not make sense to call for an increase in emergency reserves – gold holdings – and simultaneously prohibit the use of these reserves even in emergencies.
The SNB’s overriding objection to the gold initiative stems from the danger it poses to the conduct of a successful monetary policy. It would severely impair the SNB’s ability to fulfil its constitutional and legal mandate to ensure price stability while taking due account of economic developments, in the interests of the country as a whole.
* * *
We will hazard a guess that the voting will go exactly as Scotland's independence vote went - young vote for it, old against it... as fearmongering status quo managers step up the propaganda with no regard for what happens next.

http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/201...-defenses.html

oct 13 what will happen....

U.S. and U.K. Plan Banking ‘War Game’ to Test Crisis Defenses
By Scott Hamilton
October 10, 2014 6:00 PM EDT
1

Regulators in the U.S. and U.K. will carry out their first so-called war game to simulate the failure of a major cross-border bank as they test their defenses against the type of crisis that crippled the financial system in 2008.
The exercise, involving Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen and Bank of England Governor Mark Carney, will take place on Oct. 13 in Washington and is aimed at testing the global framework on bank resolution to ensure that no lender is too big to fail, according to the U.K. finance ministry. U.S. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew, Deputy Secretary Sarah Bloom Raskin and British Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne will also take part.
The move comes as governments around the world implement a package of measures designed to put an end to publicly-funded bailouts when banks collapse. The Financial Stability Board, which consists of regulators and central bankers from around the world, plans to present new rules on this issue to a Group of 20 summit next month in Brisbane, Australia.
“We need to make sure that taxpayers are not on the hook for future bank failures,” said Osborne, who told reporters at a briefing in Washington that this was the first such event. “We also need to strengthen cross-border co-operation on this issue.”
While not simulating the failure of any particular lender, the war game will look at two scenarios: that of a major U.S. bank with U.K. operations at risk of failure, and that of a major British institution with American operations faced with similar risk.
Systemically Important
The FSB maintains a list of global systemically important banks. The latest list included 29 banks and identified HSBC Holdings Plc and JPMorgan Chase & Co. as the banks whose failure would do the most damage to the global economy.
The exercise will involve the heads of the U.K.’s Prudential Regulation Authority and Financial Conduct Authority, the U.S. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.
BOE Deputy Governor for Markets and Banking Nemat Shafik, Fed Governor Daniel Tarullo, and New York Fed President William Dudley will also participate.
The U.K. central bank earlier this year tested lenders’ defenses against cyber-attacks in a war game called Waking Shark II.