why continually ramp anz down??, page-26

I am assuming synthetic AAA through diversification methodology rather than real AAA , otherwise why is their 800 and no transparency as to who ? Im betting the underlying bonds are made up of AAA down to BB, with rating agencies awarding AA for the diversification , in any case we have had so many false AAA and AA the underlying concept of any for of blended tranches has to be suspect, if not why the CDS cover in the first place?

On the elliot wave question I think it makes logical sense ot take out counts via the overall , I have posted here on the obvious global correlations with other financial s, to simplify a previous long discussion on the topic, basically all global financials are correlated until they are news effected then they break correlation , find a new level and then re-correlate , if you look at all the Australasian banks you will find pretty much complete correlation , the differences in performance can be found in the 1/30 day range where they are news effected

I am assuming synthetic AAA through diversification methodology rather than real AAA , otherwise why is their 800 and no transparency as to who ? Im betting the underlying bonds are made up of AAA down to BB, with rating agencies awarding AA for the diversification , in any case we have had so many false AAA and AA the underlying concept of any for of belended tranches has to be suspect, if not why the CDS cover in the first place?

Lets have a bit of a reality check , ignoring governments there are only 8 AAA rated companies in the US market anyway (24 globally), so 800 (the number Mike Smith keeps referring ) is almost certainly one of the ratings agencies invented investment grades.

Remember this is an upside down world things can change very quickly, remember Lehman was in 2006 Ranked #1 in the Barron's 500 annual survey of corporate performance for the largest companies in the U.S. and Canada and in 2007 Lehman Brothers ranked #1 "Most Admired Securities Firm" by Fortune, .......things can change very quickly, ratings agencies can lower ratings from AA to junk in a matter of months. I would suggest the lack of transparency from ANZ reflects that "we have a problem Houston"

Maybe I am reading to much into Mike Smiths antics, but I have heard him on a number of occasions emphasis the diversity of the bonds and its "investment grade " status, this smacks of synthetic AA diversified tranching (invented by Lehman) that made sub prime bonds such a problem

On the elliot wave question I think it makes logical sense to take out counts via the overall , I have posted here on the obvious global correlations with other financials, to simplify a previous long discussion on the topic, basically all global financial are correlated .

Accepting this and not expecting good or bad news next week from ANZ lets look at the Elliot for the S&P 500

If it breaks above .786 retracement from the November 28 high, it will mean the market is heading up. IMO this wont happen if it does it would confirm a break to above 16.60 ANZ is on the cards. My guess is against this outcome, IMO the market will fall hard next week and resume the decline that begin on November 28, taking prices below the November 21 low which would confirm we are still on a wave 3 down, if I am wrong and it breaks above the trend line then we are probably into wave 4.