MNS Chart, page-1254

I'm not confused in the slightest by someone throwing up a few EWT terms, that have very little to do with the stock we are discussing here, especial when it comes to 9 waves within an impulse wave wave extension. Isn't it a little disingenuous to even mention those terms when they aren't even visible in the MNS chart just to make some questionable point?

I have no problem with people simply using their eyes, suggesting to see a falling wedge. I held that view for a while as well, however I suggest one should start questioning that when reality suggests otherwise and at the very least find 'non bogus' reasons to back it up. Otherwise should the outcome be similar to what's expected, it once again would suggest that those people, whether bull or bear, when they are right, are right for the wrong reason, in my opinion!

I'm sure as a chartist Cabbie, having learned the lesson from your AB=CD mistake mentioned here above, you would want to make sure that you applied the proper TA and EW readings at the correct time in the correct way! After all there are further insides to be gained from this for future moves, wouldn't you agree?