what a bargain!!, page-270

You know I think AE is partly right in that I think mathematical algorithms are probably closer to what happens to the share price rather than shorter activity and market accumulation plays.

IMO it probably plays out like this:
A report is published that some housing prices in Sydney and Melbourne are not has high as they used to be which is then grabbed by the media and propelled into a negative quarter. 'Negative' for 'negative growth'. Pretty soon the media is hyping that it's been too long since a recession (two consecutive quarters of negative growth) and puts it out there that it is imminent, all because a few multi-million dollar properties didn't sell for more. Now a bank and a superfund are in the mix and the computer model runs an adjustment algorithm for factoring in an increased chance of a negative quarter. Thanks, Media. The algorithm spits out some figure like "liquefy all stock marked in accordance with the risk profile rating 'X' down by 'Y' %." GXY shares meanwhile are just bundled into some mix of holdings which are all marked with the 'X' to be liquefied by 'Y' and are sold accordingly. Multiply this by all the other institutions with a holding and you get a down day. Not even a thought about what the company is, what it is doing or any details about it at all. Just trade it because it is there and the algorithm said to sell 'that lot of holdings'.

After this happens and the computer model says that the institution is fine to go back to business someone goes in to check what's happening and says "Gee whizz this company is oversold" at which point all the funds are onto it again scrambling for shares and the price has a rebound.

Of course I may have all this completely wrong, so please do your own research and feel free to smack me down if I have it wrong. Any bank or superfund managers on this forum?