Quote from: fredhead on January 29, 2016, 06:41:29 AM

I understand what he is referring to when it comes to time and price. In the example I gave it was simply Euro vs USD, nothing more complicated. Admittedly, his timing wasn't definite but it was pretty clear that he expected it to breakdown soon, certainly not years later, as he has now adjusted it to.

You lie about or do not know the facts. He said the Euro would decline relative to USD, which it already has (from ~1.30 to ~1.05). The change is that he originally thought perhaps the USD bull market would peak 2017.9, but now he is opening to the possibility of 2020.

Quote from: sloanf on January 29, 2016, 07:07:03 PM

Quote from: altcoinUK on January 29, 2016, 06:34:27 PM

I suggest to get out from your troll cave and attend his next conference. You will meet me there (yes, some retail traders like me attend his conference), which will provide you a wonderful opportunity to apologize in person for your personal insults, and most importantly you will meet some of his serious clients there.

You yet again prove that you work for MA by selling me his conferences.

Illogical. AltcoinUK is not selling you anything. He is rebutting your trolling. You are on a crusade to slander Armstrong (and without a coherent understanding of the facts). And now you stoop to asserting that rebutting you is akin to selling something.

You do not like that MA promotes his work. Fine. So go preach on a soapbox some where. We are telling you that we find some value in reading his blog. His long-term predictions have been particularly insightful (and I have refuted all your lies/misconceptualizations about that).

Quote from: sloanf on January 29, 2016, 05:00:37 PM

MA is an uneducated convicted fraudster and con artist who lost hundreds of millions and cheated Japanese investors.

And you believe everything you read on Wikipedia without researching all the facts. Armstrong has shown the documentation that it was the banks who were cheating and when they got caught, they tried to pin it on him. But in the end, the banks admitted to it and paid a fine. He was entirely vindicated.

Also he was never convicted (certainly not in an open court with a jury of his peers, but rather the corrupt Goldman Sachs-affiliated judge kicked out all the media!). He was held illegally in contempt-of-court for 7 years because he refused to turn over the source code to his computer model to Goldman Sachs. And when they found out that his case was about to be heard by the Supreme Court, they had him beat up and his teeth knocked out in prison so that he would accede to a plea bargain deal. He was coerced.

This is like the 5th time I have explained this in this thread. It makes me very angry that you abuse my time by not reading the thread entirely before you blow your snot all over this thread.

This is all in the movie and the movie had to buy insurance about the facts being properly vetted. So the movie has already been vetted by attorneys working on behalf of the insurance company.

Dude who is paying you to slander MA? Goldman Sachs? (surely they can afford better) Or are you just some snotty n00b who found a crusade to appease boredom?