A FWIW Chart And Update

I had a plethora of inquiries the other day as to if my view of the “markets” had changed with the recent surge higher. The answer was: “No, at least not at this time.”

So far the “markets” appear, to my eye, still behaving in a manner that conforms to a very technical path.

Could it surge higher into the great beyond once again as it has done all these years? Of course it can, and the odds of it doing just that are in its favor.

However, on the flip side of that argument, is the argument I’ve been expressing, and it is this: These “markets” seem to be acting in a manner that implies things can no longer be taken as they have been over the years, for something (at least to those willing to actually look) has changed underneath the surface. And its causes and effects going forward, for even greater volatility, are increasing by the day, not decreasing. No matter what the so-called “smart crowd” tries to sell tell anyone.

Below is a chart of the S&P 500™ Futures at about 7:30am ET this morning. The bars/candles represent 15 minute intervals. I have made a few notations which I believe are important, for this reason: At 8:30am ET or within the hour after this post the new Chair of The Federal Reserve, Jerome Powell will make his opening remarks to congress public. If for some reason the headline reading, HFT bots read something they do not like, things could go awry, in a hurry.

Does this mean it will? No one knows, they could do the exact opposite and force this “market” back into the stratosphere. But watching for any reactions to this very important first appearance to a new Fed. Chair is imperative for anyone in business.

If the “markets” suddenly falter and reach the points I have highlighted? As always, caution should be on-the-front-foot, as they say. Everything I have expressed in this conversation when I first started it still stands, even as we’ve, once again, reached these higher levels. Below is today’s “picture.” To wit:


As always, we shall see. But this time, it shouldn’t be long.

© 2018 Mark St.Cyr

Why The InfoWars vs YouTube Matters

For those not aware there is somewhat of an information war brewing across what is now known as “new media”, which is the now well-worn catch-phrase for any viewpoint that is found on the internet.

Some may have a knee jerk reactions of, “Well…Duh!” Yet, what I want to address is not the same argument, nor fight, that most believe it to be. No, what I want to address here is this may be the very tipping point where everything concerning new-media, the web, along with social, may change and change as was once said, “bigly.”

The reason why I’m going to call your attention to this growing kerfuffle between InfoWars™ (the web-based opinion/news channel) and YouTube™ is for this reason:

It may be that seminal moment that proves everything one thought they needed to do via the internet, and that platforms that provided the scale needed – is no longer valid – needed – as well as important.

The beauty here, from my perspective, is that it will all come down to what should matter: Pure capitalistic principles, constitutional protections,  and an adherence to what should be a company’s first rule for being: Serve a customer that will pay for your product or services.

Knowing who, or whom that customer is, is the #1 job of every company. It is my argument that, “The Valley” has never learned that properly. And it is that, dear reader, which may be the fulcrum, or catalyst that propels the change, which changes everything in Silicon Valley, exposing its worst nightmare scenario.

That scenario? They’re no longer needed or wanted. Hint: AOL™, Yahoo™, i.e. any and all prior “Legacy media platforms.”

The initial process of atrophy, in similar ways experienced in print media, in my opinion, has already begun and now increasingly so, for today’s social media giants (think Facebook™ Twitter™, Snap™, et al) mimicking the changes first observed when “the web and social” first began taking its toll on legacy media.

The real problem for “The Valley” is this: At the least, legacy media grew over the years based on paying customers, and they’re still trying to get their models in line to do just that, whether successfully or not. So there may be still a chance (however slim) for them if they go back (as in create a product people actually want to pay for) to those once time-honored business practices.

“The Valley” on the other hand, has truly had only one customer, and that customer is “Wall Street”, with an expense account made available, and paid for, via Central Bank largess.

And they (Central Banks) are in the process of “cutting up the credit cards.”

These are, or can be, the pivotal points in business where experts survey the landscape, begin weighing new information, and use the purely technical term to describe what may be on the horizon as that, “Uh, Oh” moment.”

And we may be at precisely this point. Here’s why…

Whether one likes, hates, agrees, disagrees, or doesn’t know of InfoWars, is immaterial. All I want to focus on here is what is relevant from a business perspective. (i.e., the current battle between Info and YT) And how this may impact any future business considerations one may have.

The reasoning is simple: This could be, as I iterated earlier, a big deal that effects everyone going forward from a business perspective. So again, leave any personal tastes to the side, for now.

Here’s the current fight: YouTube (YT) has enacted a policy that may ban InfoWars (IW) from its platform. As of this writing they (IW) currently has one strike against them in a “three strikes, you’re out” styled policy on YT.

Can this be done? Well I’m not a constitutional scholar, but I believe via a business lens, sure. YT is a business, and I believe it should be able to kick off anyone it wants, for what ever the reasoning it sees fit.

Is it an absolutely stupid enforcement of a policy, that make no sense and can be shown (and easily) to be purely hypocritical?

Incontrovertibly, yes, and may be more harmful monetarily wise to YT (along with its parent Alphabet™) than IW going forward.

In fact – it may be an actual boon for IW, in more ways than one, proving where the one that thought “they ruled”, may end up being the one financially ruined.

Let’s remember a very important business fact using this example, as the general example for all:

IW is the reason people (and that number is millions upon millions) go on to YT. (an intentional, over-simplified example, for demonstration purposes)

YT per se, has no product to offer other than: be the host for the actual product, which allows them to sell their “ads for eyeballs” data.

To reiterate, or clarify the point: If there is no IW on YT – YT is just a platform that hosts a blank page with no content. For YT creates nothing.

Again, over-simplification, for example purposes. Yet, this goes the same for the entire “social media” complex in general. i.e., They create nothing, but a platform for the content creators (which would be you dear reader) to post, share, and interact with each-other – then – sell all your interactions and data profiles to the highest bidder. That’s it. Period.

That’s why it’s all “free” to use, for you, and in-turn, makes the owners of these platforms rich beyond comparison, all at your expense, literally. Remember: if you’re not paying for a product – you are the product. Think about it.

Now here’s the outlier, but in actuality, is the heart-of-the-matter for this story, which I feel is lost on far too many. And it is this:

There was a time, just a very few years ago, where hosting a platform that could deal, or allowed, access to both a consistent, as well as surge of viewers in the millions – was unaffordable to most.

In other words, you could not, on your own and even for most businesses: post, then host, even a few seconds of video on your own website at a cost that was affordable. It literally cost thousands, upon thousands, upon thousands of dollars to do it just a few years ago. (i.e., let’s say 5 or so for context)

Trust me, I know, which is why I refrained from video and more over the years, for that very reason.

I’ll just add this for a bit more context, because I feel it’s germane:

Many talk about “going viral”, but now use the term loosely. But until you understand what that truly means, and what it can (or did) cost you in real dollars and cents, as in actually being billed for services when your web host suddenly charges you thousands, upon thousands of dollars for “traffic overages,” or “traffic spike pricing”, because your current “plan” didn’t address such, or you never thought such a thing possible? You don’t truly understand what “going viral” may cost you from a business perspective.

And I have intimate knowledge of the power of IW’s traffic, for one of my articles appeared on their front page a few years back, and it wasn’t until then did I understand what the phrase “going viral” truly meant, along with their stated traffic numbers. i.e., When IW declares “millions?” They’re not kidding, at least that’s my perspective. So that’s why you needed a YT, or other hosting platform such as Social and for many, made economic sense.

But, (and it’s a very big but) that has all changed very recently. And it is the purveyors of these once, all-mighty platforms, that seem to have not gotten, “the memo.”

You can (which I myself am already in the process of doing) host current, as well as archived: audio, video, text, and more. Hire platforms with servers that can handle nominal traffic that may suddenly spike to millions of viewers, and remain elevated for long periods of time simultaneously, along with subscription services, user analytics, payment portals, and much, much more. And here’s the important point…

Completely under ones own control and purview, not only affordably, but the pricing is falling so fast it’s becoming almost crazy to do it any other way.

And that works to IW’s advantage – not YT’s. And that’s a very, very, very (did I say very?) big point to focus on, as well as remember going forward.

Will, or can IW be hurt financially by this current policy? Sure, but let’s think here for a moment, from a pure business perspective, shall we?

IW gets hurt up front, but they still create the product that millions want to see. If it’s not on YT, and the customers still want the product? They’ll just go directly to IW’s own proprietary outlet, if that’s what gets done.

It will, of course, have some impact on IW’s bottom line, initially. But that’s not a bad thing if makes that “bottom line” all theirs, for all their efforts. i.e., Short-term losses for long-term gains via cutting out the middle-man. (e.g. YT.)

YT, on the other hand, gets what for its new policy stance?

Millions, upon millions, upon millions of fewer eyeballs to harvest and sell their data to the highest bidders. Which, basically, is its main, if not only true product.

And who is the buyer of that product narrative? Hint: Wall Street.

So let’s add a few things up using 1+1=2 math for business purposes, under the guise of an analogy, shall we?

IW loses traffic initially via YT – yet once its millions of viewers/customers are no longer available to view on YT, they just change their “bookmark” from YT to IW and are able to consume their product however IW sees fit, along with the ability for IW to sell further add-ons of what ever may be their choice going forward. No YT needed.

YT gets? Zip – Zero – Nada. Along with having to explain to Wall Street (conjecture of course) why traffic or user numbers are stagnant, or worse, falling.

And here is the “800-LB Gorilla” in all of this…

How many follow IW’s lead?

If the numbers in the last earnings reports from “The Valley” have given any clue? This battle may be looking at being over, before those who thought they owned the web knew they were even at war.

Can you say “AOL?”

© 2018 Mark St.Cyr


An Update To: 1 – 2 – 3?

(Please note: The following is an intentional rant, if you want to skip and just see the “pictures?” They are at the bottom and are self explanatory.)

Early last week I started a running conversation of a path I believed these “markets” were about to take. Subsequently, I’ve written in detail my reasoning,, along with charts, starting with the following article “Do What You Will.” Since then I, unlike most, have posited my thinking before such moves were apparent and, again, explained my reasoning for it and – let the chips fall where they may. (You can view here, here)

The impetus behind noting the above is for this reason: As many of you know the entire reason why I began commenting on markets, now these 9 years, was out of my complete and utter frustration during the initial phases of the financial crisis beginning in 2007. I had just since retired at the age of 45, moved to another state where my wife and I had no prior knowledge, no friends, and no family members present. We were on the adventure of our lifetimes, as so we thought.

Because as it is now entered into the journals of history: Then – the proverbial stuff hit the fan. Problem was – it was more like a septic truck opened its cargo directly into a jet engine. Yes, “adventure of a lifetime.” Hint: Be careful what you wish for.

It was during this time that I finally came to the realization that most, if not all so-called “financial experts”, “gurus” of every stripe that are paraded across the media have absolutely no clue about what is truly transpiring in regards to not only the capital markets, but business in general and how it really works in relation to it.

To be kind (and trust me I am, for I could lace this page with profanity that would make a hip-hop star envious if I said how I really felt) what you see/hear/read trotted out, more often than not, that is supposedly “insightful”, “actionable”, or “accurate” is nothing more than linguistic gymnastics to build a narrative that has all the components of a purely, intentional, specious declaration, to sound as if they knew what had, or was about to transpire, good or bad. Hint: Most, if not all, is pure unadulterated bull crap. Period, full stop.

Case in point: I have made my bones about CNBC™ over the years and my literal disgust of what they portray as “insightful” business/market news. I have labeled their “Money Madman” as one of the most dangerous people to one’s 401K. Not because I think this, but as he would say, “Do your own homework.” For if you do? You’ll find all one needs to know about his so-called “insights.” Hint: Bear Sterns.

He’s now bigger than ever on that channel as they seemed to have made it their goal to immerse him in perpetual image rebuild mode – and the ratings are lower than ever along with it. Correlation, causation, or both? Think about it.

If that’s not any of the causation behind it, let me give you another: Dennis Gartman.

This “world-renowned commodity guru” as he is introduced ad nauseam across the media (more often on CNBC) dispenses his so-called “prognostications” for the financial masses.

When listening or reading any of his insights, one has to shake off the feeling that they’ve been transported back into the 18 century via his dissertations laced with “hitherto, therefore, we shall be diligently forthright in our bah, blah. blah.”

I’m no wordsmith, and Lord knows I have my shortcomings with just common english. But this facade of sounding “Oh so intelligent” while delivering useless dribble, more often than not, has now moved far past the annoying, directly into the aghast and appalled category. Here’s why, via Zero Hedge™. To wit:

“Dennis Gartman Blows Up With Investment In Riot Blockchain”

When Michelle Caruso-Cabrera ran her Riot Blockchain CNBC expose  last Friday, sending the stock plunging, experienced financial commentators couldn’t help but snicker having known well in advance the company has been a fraud ever since it decided to “pivot” from veterinary products last October to chasing the latest and greatest stock boosting buzzword of the day (in this case, blockchains), while suckering in countless naive retail investors on the escalator up who would soon take the elevator right back down.

Still, many wondered if any more “respected” investors would be caught in the bloodbath.

As it turns out, the answer is yes.

As Dennis Gartman writes in his latest daily letter, none other than the “world-renowned” commodity guru admitted that “Friday was one of the worst days we have suffered through in a very long  while” for the simple reason that Gartman was long – in his retirement account no less – Riot Blockchain.

I need not add another word except that one should read the aforementioned article for oneself. And to those of you that, for whatever the reasons, have watched, or still watch (which by their numbers in near nil) this channel for “insight?”

You have my condolences.


Below are the charts mentioned in the title:

It all began with this:

Then I updated and posited the following:

And here we are before the “market” opening as of last night’s close:

Will #3 develop? No one knows, but so far no one else has dared make such a call along with putting oneself on the line with actual targets and explainations that even a “financial guru” should be able to understand.

But then again, I’m not a “Wall Street” guy.

Which has always been my point.

© 2018 Mark St.Cyr



A Bit Of Perspective

It is hard as I type this to not be, once again, inundated with news about something pertaining to either Bitcoin™, or cryptocurrencies in general. Once again there are ads about retirement, making “oooodles” of profits, and so forth. So much so that if I actually owned a “bit” I would gladly surrender one full “coin” at whatever today’s market value is just to purchase a spam-filter powerful enough to make it all stop. It is beyond ridiculous, not just the ads per se, but the self-serving articles being published as some form of “insightful research” to “guide you through the potential profits ahead for cryptocurrencies.”

Let’s just call it what it is, shall we? Self serving, spam pretending to be written under the guise of research.

My opinion of most, if not all, is this: It’s not worth the digital ink its written on. And if I were a digital dead fish? I would be embarrassed to be wrapped in any of it, yes, it stinks that bad.

So with the above said I just would like to offer what Silicon Valley likes to call a “picture” as to offer some (actually my) perspective. To wit:



The above chart represents Bitcoin’s current value based in $Dollars as of today around 9:00am ET. The bars/candles represent daily increments. I have made some notations to add some perspective to exactly where it currently is trading at, and how it got there. The route as they say, is a little different from what is being told and sold currently.

Let’s make this simple shall we? Or as one of my favorite comedians would say, (Joan Rivers) : “Can we talk here?”

The reason for the current “mania” that seems to be taking place throughout the crypto arena is that Bitcoin has suddenly “doubled” in value over the last week or so. Sounds utterly fantastic right?

Well, it is if you were one of the daring that bought in when it crashed to that level which represented a near 75% loss, for a great many.

You know, the many that were counting their digital gains before they turned them into cold-hard-cash. Oh, and don’t forget the ones that actually put in cold-hard-cash at that top. Remember? All at the advice of many of those “gurus.” Their losses aren’t digital – they’re real. Think about it.

As the above chart shows: All that has happened over the course of the last few weeks is that Bitcoin has made what is known in technical analysis land as an “oversold bounce back to the upper-side of a channel, in a well established down trend.” Period.

Could it rocket higher? Sure, who knows, But what I’m addressing is what is actually taking place via a real world view. Not: Fantasyland.

Again, all it has done is to recover from being some 75% down, to now only about 50%. That’s the real world.

Or, said differently: If you were one of the “lucky” to “invest for your retirement” at the top at around $20,000? Instead of your net balance being around $5800, it’s now at about $11,000.

Just another $9K or so to go, and you can break even. Just hope you didn’t need any of that “retirement” money to pay the bills over the last few month. But hey, it’s sure to double again, right? And soon, right? But wait, they said that at $20K, so, who knows I guess. But then again, who cares! After all, it’s only money, right? Or is it? Hmmmm. Maybe we should ask the “gurus” again? After all, they would be the ones that know, correct? Just look at their track-record. Wait, ah, yeah, sorry, let’s move on shall we…

Here’s the dirty little secret no one else will dare say – so I will, and it is this (All my opinion, as well as conjecture):

Unless you were one of the few (and it is a very few) that for whatever the reason took a chance and purchased crypto when it was the equivalent of pizza money? There is nothing when looking at the chart above that can not be done like: doubling, tripling, quadrupling, and more of one’s money in plain old, far more secure trading venues like options, dreaded penny stocks, and more.

People (as in professional day traders et al) do it all the time, and nearly everyday. The caveat that goes with is this: They also blowup their accounts just as spectacularly as they made it. Some, so much so, that they may even end up owing far more than they ever made. If you think that isn’t so, then my guess is you truly don’t understand trading and all its risks. But I digress.

If, for whatever the reasons, the crypto-gods decide to levitate their markets to around $115,000.00 (no, that’s not a typo) that’s how far or much it would take to make the types of returns that were gained, then lost, by those represented via that first arrow marked “This is the real…” when it traversed from about $4K in parabolic fashion to around $20K. You know, when all the “gurus” told everyone to “get in!”

If you are in the crypto space right now and currently sitting at around 11K? You need to ask the most compelling, as well as important question:

Looking at the above chart – what are the chances of it rocketing up to $115K over the next several months raining riches upon those of the HODL investing crowd – vs – the odds of it falling back down to where I have marked with “Next” leaving a wake of destruction for almost all that ever bought into the hype?

Bonus question, this one for the “gurus” themselves:

If in fact this thing does begin to fall back to Earth and approaches the bottom portion of that channel, what then?

Should they still HODL? Or, get out then, and break even?

Other than that, I have no strong feelings on the matter. Do with it what you will.

© 2018 Mark St.Cyr

Social Media’s Real News Problem: The Russian ‘Worm’ Has Turned

Channeling, Jan Brady of The Brady Bunch®, “It’s always about Russia, Russia, Russia!”

The so-dubbed “real news” mainstream media outlets, along with most (if not all) channels of social media have done nothing but pound the airwaves, print, digital, and near anything else that can relay a message to the masses of “Russian collusion” into our politics.

This ongoing campaign is rivaled only in scope, as well as consistency, than those used in actual war, when the bottom of planes would open and drop what is known as “dumb-bombs” indiscriminately on the masses below.

Most, if not all, of social media today (and the mainstream) have far more in common with dumb-bomb campaigns of old, than anything ever approaching the realm of intelligible. Or, said differently: They are the digital equivalent of dumb-bombing an entire populace – having near the same effect. i.e., Their mind is blown, but that “blown” means into a useless mass. Not something “enlightening” as those trying to argue its value.

However, what now seems apparent in all this comes, ironically, from the once infallible responses to all that questioned anything regarding social, e.g., “It’s different this time.” Hint: it sure is, for it would seem that “worm” has now turned, especially for those that consumed it in mass quantities.

If there’s one thing you can count on, it is this: Special Counsel/Prosecutors that are empowered under political auspices to hunt down improprieties are not going to stop till someone, anyone, is found guilty of something. Even if the so-called “crime” is only a “process matter” i.e., Someone may honestly have forgotten to answer something, but then inadvertently answers it later, regardless of how menial the revelation may be. History is full of such examples, which is why the adage, “If a Special Prosecutor is enacted – someone’s going to jail – even if it must be the janitor!” was born.

So why is the above important? Well it’s for this reason:

Regardless of where your views on the entire “Russia-gate” thing may lie, one thing is now clearly evident: It would appear the entire scale, scope, and direction it was all predicated on  – has all but fell apart. And the latest announcement all but proves this point.

An announcement that there has been, indeed, charges brought. It just turns out that (wait for it…) they’re all Russian. e.g., No Americans, which therefore renders the entire “collusion” narrative as it has been presented, as well as amplified – moot. That is, all except for one. i.e., Social media, and in particularly, Facebook™ (FB), although Alphabet™, aka Google™, via its YouTube™ subsidiary may also feel the sting. For the busy-body-bees aka politicians, are beginning to coalesce and swarm directly in all their direction.

Mark Zuckerberg has made it abundantly clear by many of his actions over the last few years, that he’s very interested in politics. Many are waging a presidential run is in the very near future. As enamored with politics as he may be, the one thing that may come back to bite him in far more ways than even he may expect (or, has data on, think about it) is his own, ever evolving responses, in regards to safeguarding users, of all stripes, on FB.

Let’s just say, if he was under oath when he has given many of his usual, “Oh gee, golly whiz…” type of responses? Let’s just say, it’s of my belief, there would be many, many lawyers, having a billing fueled, banner year. All on FB’s expense account.

FB executives, lawyers, along with Mark himself in their responses to manipulation of content and their control over it, have changed more times than a Kardashian update.( i.e., Remember when it was all, and only about conservatives being maligned? The numbers and variations are far too numerous to list, but I’ll just jog your memory:

In regards to the “conservative” outcries of censorship. Remember it was all, “Gee whiz, golly gee, we really want to get to the bottom of this, blah, blah, blah” that prompted a sit down between maligned publishers and Zuck & Crew?

Remember the responses that came forward that were along the lines of, “It’s all the algorithms fault! There are no humans involved that could/would censor.” Then, when it was manifestly found that this was an out-and-out falsehood,  it was “Oh golly, gee whiz, we’re sorry, that’s exactly what is taking place, we’re going to fix that, trust us.”

There have been more instances similar, if not identical, to that premise. (e.g., What the Steven Crowder lawsuit alleged.)

Need I remind anyone that after this aforementioned “sit down” took place, the calls for not only, not fixing, but rather, an even more heavy-handed (i.e., what many deemed directly toward the conservative viewpoint) for censoring seemed to be the response and result over these ensuing months, to a point where, if you dared even have a right arm, you might be booted off via FB adding more human censors! All in the name of “protecting users.”

Just so happens nearly all alternative views (i.e., any adult arguments) seemed to end up in the “extremist category.” This was to answer, or placate, the growing chorus of politicians. (most, if not all on the so-called “left” side of the spectrum)

This was an obvious ham-fisted response (at least as I interpreted it) to the growing anger being directed FB’s way. For if there’s one thing that always remains the same. it’s this:

If a politician (of any stripe) has a the ability to use a scape-goat and lay blame (any blame) of a defeat from their feet, to someone else’s? Hint: It’s going to happen. Regardless of whether its truthful, or even makes sense. And Zuck & Crew are finding themselves directly in the path of this growing goat trail.

Remember when the calls of Russia infiltrating and influencing via FB and others was met with very little regard by FB?

So seriously (as in, appearances) did Mark and the other CEO’s (i.e., of Alphabet, Twitter™ et al.) take the call to show themselves before the inquisition panels of Congress, he (along with the others) decided it might be best to not go, send the underlings. Hint: That was a very big mistake in my humble opinion. For there is probably only one thing on the Earth that may come into the same warning for caution as “Nothing rivals a woman’s scorn.” And that’s – “or a losing politicians.” And that “scorn” is beginning to metastasize.

If one listened to the indictment handed down by the Special Council of Friday, to the horror of many – there were people named, only, there were no “Americans” implicated.

Yet, that doesn’t mean there wasn’t an “American complex” that escaped without charge. No, what that press conference clearly conveyed (if one was listening) was the entity that did not escape rebuke was: “Social Media.”

In actuality, the blame for all of the current ills of politics is being laid directly at the feet of social, and in particular, FB.

Dear Zuck & Crew. Can you say, “Uh-Oh?”

I state that for one reason, and one reason only, and it is this:

Regardless of how one (e.g., Mark Zuckerberg et al.) now pleads that it was not, nor could have been “The Russians” paying for, and manipulating the election. Here’s what he (or social in general) may not be able to defend against. i.e., the calls of regulation coming from politicians.

You can hear the arguments being formulated already, if, you listen carefully. Here’s an example of what I mean…

Calls for the sake of “preserving our democracy” by immediately, actively, pursuing and enabling laws and regulations to protect: “the young – the vulnerable – the snow-flaked cadre of unsuspecting eyeballs that peruse social media and in-particular FB. Where the sole purpose appears to be nothing more than you (or your company) selling those susceptible – emotionally anguished eyeballs – to ad agencies, along with their personal data.

All which you’ve mined as a billable property or resource, for you (or your company) to exploit. All in the name of profit! All of it making you and your executives stinking rich, as the country suffers. All while you, your company, and your executives pursue your insatiable lust, for money – and power.”

All tongue-in-cheek, however, do you think it’s that far off? You can hear the rallying cries now. i.e., “Mr Zuckerberg! How many mansions do you need to sleep at, all paid for via the poor and trusting souls, whose data you sell, that visit your cathedral of ‘Fake news?!’ All in the name of profits!!!”

Can you envision how this might be played out in an election campaign coming soon to a voting both near you? If you don’t think so? Let me make this additional observation for you to weigh its possibility for yourself:

For those maybe not aware, FB has now, suddenly, detailed how it all (e.g., Russian meddling) took place – after-the-fact, as in: the “Russians” were actively spending all that accused collusion money – after – the election had already transpired. And, was targeted to undermine – Trump!

Can you say, “Holy Molly, Batman?” Gee, how convenient FB found that out, now, when the finger-pointing is suddenly all on social, is it not? i.e., “Gee golly whiz, it couldn’t have been anything we did, by golly, we looked and looked hard and guess what? It appears that narrative we let play on when it seemed to work for our purposes, well, by golly, gee whiz, no need to worry any longer about that! We found out it couldn’t have been anything we did, sooooo, nothing to see here, thanks!”

Whether true or not, sorry, too late. For the real news is this…

It will be the party social media favored and catered to (i.e., the left) that will now call for over burdensome government regulation to make sure what they deemed happened, whether true or not, never sees the “like” of day again. Ev-va!

Regardless of how many animatronic, focus grouped, pleads of denial Mark contends. After all, in the size and scope of what may be on the horizon?

Those very pleas might be deemed “censored for questionable content” in the coming future, because when it comes to propaganda…

Governments hate competition.

© 2018 Mark St.Cyr


Not To Scare The Children, But…

It’s an eerily quiet morning as I’m looking at the “markets” as to see what has transpired overnight. As of this writing the level that I said to “watch” has done precisely what I proposed. Again, as of this writing, there is no real follow through either way, which turns my apprehensive radar to 11.

As I outlined last evening the possibility of the scenario that I argued playing out gains odds the longer we both stay, and fall away from that level I highlighted. So the big question on everyone’s mind, I’m sure (for it’s also on mine) is this: “Then what?” Fair question, so here’s my hypothesis. To wit:


The above is the S&P 500™ Futures represented via daily bar/candles. If, and I must implore, if the scenario plays out in a similar fashion to what I argued the other day, what you see above represents where I believe this market has the potential to realize in short order.

I used the futures for two reasons, the first:

The futures contracts are where “Pros” or “Big Money” as they say, reside. This is where the hedges and others will be made and the swings to where there may, or may not be a floor or ceiling gets represented here best. And if you look at the levels I marked with a 1 or 2, they line up far too squarely with other technical levels that both humans, as well as machines might follow. So this is where I would be focusing for any and most clues, especially when volatility has once again reared its head.

The reasoning is simple: The futures trade overnight, hence, if a level of support or resistance plays out in the overnight, it may in effect precede any, and all exuberance, or fear, in the normal hour markets. This is how you could wake up to “Black Monday” type scenarios, or panic selling into the close may be reversed in the overnight hours leading to what may seem as a euphoric buying frenzy at the open.

It’s been many years since any of these scenarios have even been postulated, never mind, even considered possible, But with the Fed. now in the “pulling money out” mode as compared to “putting money in.” One has to once again be ready for anything.

Will it play out this way? Hint: No one knows. However, with that said here’s the underlying premise coupled with a probable conclusion.

As you look at the above chart remember this…

Everyone, especially the so-called smartest of the smart paraded on media argued the above “cliff dive” was all but assured to not be in the cards. And there it is, and now sits in the #1 position of history as the most points lost – ever – in a single day, coupled with, these same people said that based on what they perceived as “all baked in” any and all QT (quantitative tightening) worries, i.e., “The market knows, it’s prepared, the economy is strong, not an issue, blah, blah, blah.” Or, my now personal favorite, “If you’re holding cash, you’re going to feel pretty stupid” That came from none other than Ray Dalio as he appeared with the fawning mainstream business/financial media press at Davos. Or said differently: If you’re not all in on stocks, you’re stupid.

Then the above happened, and now, it appears he’s changed his mind.

Funny how that happens as soon as The Fed. went from lip service of reducing the balance sheet, to full implementation as Janet walks out the door, is it not?

Then again, what do I know. Just ask the “experts.”

© 2018 Mark St.Cyr

An Addendum To ‘Do What You Will’

I just wanted to follow-up with something I’m looking at this evening, because I was inundated today from friends and colleagues asking me for more details as the day wore on. And I wanted to share a bit more, in far more detail, for those wanting to know.

Of course, as has been the usual over these last few days, the “markets” continue to recover.  However, from a purely technical view, this recovery has all the hallmarks of what used to known as “normal market action in response to an oversold condition.”

This type of rebound has been all but extinct these last years. Remember: The sell off of last week was the greatest one day point drop in the “market” in its history. Don’t let that point be lost or forgotten to quickly.

Yes, it looks to an untrained eye as just another version of a JBTFD (just buy the f’n dip) type recovery. But when you look under-the-hood closely, to a trained eye (which I have) there are things that stand out. What those “things” are are far too numerous to go into detail or explain here. All I can say is – “It’s different this time” is not going to work in favor of the JBTFD crowd if what may be lurking pans out.

When you hear the term, “There’s no one trading except the machines” what it means can be interpreted a million different ways, both good and bad, depending on your viewpoint.

However, with that said, although many will see the sudden spike higher today as good news, regardless who or what is trading it, when it comes to “liquidity” issues (as in if there is or not any, and at the needed times) “tells” or “clues” are always something one needs to be constantly on the look for. And let’s just say with Asia markets now closed for a lunar holiday? Things could turn both sour, as well as appear exuberant, depending on which way the “paper cup” gets tossed around. That “paper cup” today represents the “market.”

Below is something that fits that bill, and has caught my eye. To wit:

(Chart Source)

The above chart represents the S&P 500™ Futures this evening as of about 7:30pm EST. I have made a notation of “Watch this level” on it. The reasoning is via a bunch of different indicators and more (I left a few simple Fibonacci elements which are the color coded) should that level hold as some form of brick wall and suddenly reverse? Then one truly needs to watch what happens during the live “markets” on Friday.

If the above plays out overnight, the next process to watch for I have notated on the following chart which is the S&P during regular hours. To wit:

The above chart represents it at the close today. I have made adjustments to my previous chart and trend lines that I related to this morning and made notations that should be easy to follow for anyone not practically adept in technical analysis.

There’s no need to over think or try to reason out why I state what I’m arguing. All you need to know is that if the following happens in line with the way I’ve posited? Then one needs to pay very, very, very (did I say very?) close attention to these “markets” going forward.

The reasoning behind that argument is this: If it does play out – it’s different this time – and not in a good way.

For all we know this market could give all of this the middle digit and rocket once again into the great beyond, as it has done so many times before.

And then again, it could fall in a manner much like last week, out-of-the-blue, and eclipse that day’s historical record – to reiterate: for largest one day decline in history.

I only make these observations and notations because, I believe, we may be at a significant market inflection point that demands attention. And not just some run-of-the-mill type of event, but something much more serious. And just about no one is either calling attention to it, or worse, prepared for it.

As always, we shall see. But we need to make sure we’re watching – first.

© 2018 Mark St.Cyr

Do With It What You Will

I make the following observations only for those looking for possible insights as to how their businesses make be impacted now, or in the future.

Unlike others in the “business prognosticating field” that I deem as being more harmful than helpful (actually more like useless, but that’s just me) I share my view on the markets, because as I have stated far too many times to count: If you’re in business today, you must have – at a minimum – a cursory understanding of global markets and how they are interconnected. For in today’s world of instant communication and almost as instant trade concerns, unlike the sales pitch attributed to fun in Vegas, “What happens elsewhere, doesn’t stay there.” i.e., A commodity surge, or rout overseas can have near instant impact on ancillary goods or services overnight that your business may depend on. Hint: Think Global shipping for one.

So, it is with that in mind I also want to remind everyone, because I think it bears repeating, even though it is posted in multiple places on this site. To wit:

DISCLAIMER: Please be aware that all opinions expressed are just that – opinions. And should not be construed, nor should one infer, that I am in any way, shape, manner, or form a financial adviser, or recommending what one should do with their investing, or any other monetary decisions.
For legal advice in these matters one should always research an accredited financial planner, accountant, or lawyer for actionable counsel.

Now, with that said, here’s what I’m looking at for those who want to know…

Below is a chart of the S&P 500™ as of about 10:00am EST. The reason why I’m making these updates far more frequent is only for the reason that if what I believe I’m contemplating via current price movements across the “markets” there is a very high possibility that the markets could be suddenly panicked. Again. And the ramifications of such should be kept front of mind for anyone in business. To wit:


My last observation came to fruition nearly minutes after I made them, which I marked with an arrow and text, Now we are at a point where if, and it is an if, we suddenly begin reversing over the remaining of the week and close in or below the box, then what I may be worried about has a higher probability of appearing than not. That “worry” is for a violent, sudden sell off.

Will it happen? Who knows. Could we rocket ever higher? Sure could. Should you be on the lookout for clues that it might, or might not? If you’re in business? There’s only one answer.

As always: We shall see.

© 2018 Mark St.Cyr



Joining ‘The Club’

There are clubs or associations we may want to join, there are others we don’t. Some of us are of the type, to quote Groucho Marx, “There’s no club we want to join that would have us as a member.”

Then there are the clubs that simply join you, whether you ask or not. Today I was the proud bearer of bad news to welcome my wife into a club I knew she would take offense to. That club? A.A.R.P. (American Association of Retired Persons)

This month is my wife’s birthday for the big 5 – 0. She loves her birthday’s, yet, this one is one where the number shall not be named. So, being the loving husband that I am, I handed her the mail today containing a complimentary woman’s magazine for her birthday. When she looked at it, she asked, “What’s this?” I responded, “It’s a complimentary magazine for your birthday!” She said, “That’s nice, who sent it?” I said, “AARP, welcome to the club.”

The silence in my home ever since has been both deafening, as well as scary.

It seems my jocular notions have now befallen me into a club I had no idea I was joining, nor wanted to be a part of. That club?

The “Couch Club.”

© 2018 Mark St.Cyr



(For those who say I just don’t get it…get this!)

When it comes to business there are a few things that are as predictable as claiming water to be wet, and that is this:

From, The Business of I:

“Smart executives inherently know the best time to seize the opportunity as to move money from one project that is not working as planned, to another, is when that move can be viewed under some form of righteous umbrella or banner, for the rewards of argument in doing so will help mask all prior misjudgments or poor reasoning for any prior allocations of resources, such as money.”

The above is from one of my seminars, the following is from my article over the weekend. To wit:

“Advertisers have been both lazy, as well as unsure when it has come to advertising on social. But now more and more are questioning their budgets, because (wait for it…) it would seem far more have not panned out as they were originally sold. i.e., Most never paid for themselves. And the once adamant “ad  agency pros” are having to answer for those poor results. And it’s getting more difficult by the day.

When the client says “put me in social, regardless” you put them in. When they start asking “What am I getting for all this social?” The campaigns begin changing. And that has been ongoing for a bit, and I look for it to be accelerating. FB and Google, I have contended, has seen “growth” in its advertising business only for being the last juggernauts standing. If the latest earnings are to be looked over with an inquiring eye of what the future may portend. Growth may be a harder term to apply in future reports.”

So why write about this today? Fair point, and it is this. Again, to wit:

From the Wall Street Journal™, “Unilever Threatens to Reduce Ad Spending on Tech Platforms That Don’t Combat Divisive Content”

“Unilever will not invest in platforms or environments that do not protect our children or which create division in society, and promote anger or hate,” Unilever Chief Marketing Officer Keith Weed is expected to say Monday during the Interactive Advertising Bureau’s annual leadership meeting in Palm Desert, Calif.

“We will prioritize investing only in responsible platforms that are committed to creating a positive impact in society,” he will say, according to prepared remarks.

And just a reminder for those who may not be familiar with Unilever or its ad budget, here’s how the WSJ describes them: “Unilever, one of the world’s largest advertisers…”

So, (channeling my inner, Commander Swanbeck) here’s your assignment, should you choose to accept it  …

Do you think if the ad dollars they’ve been spending on these platforms were returning sales dividends to their bottom line they would be calling for such?

Or, do you think this is just the opportunity to make some waves and bring attention to the brand and reallocate those precious ad dollars elsewhere under the guise of, “Sorry dear social media sales rep. but we just can’t work (as in pay) any longer. Call us in 6 months, maybe your ways (and pricing at steep discounts) will be more advantageous to us in the future. Until then, remember – “If your phone (or in-box) isn’t pinging? You know it’s me.”

Can you say, “Self-destruct?”

© 2018 Mark St.Cyr

Footnote: These “FTWSIJDGIGT” articles came into being when many of the topics I had opined on over the years were being openly criticized for “having no clue”. Yet, over the years these insights came back around showing maybe I knew a little bit more than some were giving me credit for. It was my way of tongue-in-cheek as to not use the old “I told you so” analogy. I’m saying this purely for the benefit of those who may be new or reading here for the first time (and there are a great many of you and thank you too all). I never wanted or want to seem like I’m doing the “Nah, nah, nah, nah, nah” type of response to my detractors. I’d rather let the chips fall – good or bad – and let readers decide the credibility of either side. Occasionally however, there are, and have been times they do need to be pointed out which is why these now have taken on a life of their own. (i.e., something of significance per se that may have a direct impact on one’s business etc., etc.) And readers, colleagues, and others have requested their continuance.