Ahhh, I see your point. I really don't think double digits are sustainable either - sustainable being the key word. We may have buyers come in and jack the price up but there are many many people who would like to sell in the $100 + range, so I don't see a prolonged rally unless those buyers start coming in force. For that we need something - news, another bank to go under, interest rates to really rise, etc.
I don't like being in Fiat but I get the feeling we will slowly settle below 100. I worked some numbers by studying the chart (and past charts) and came up with a bounce off the $90 range on our way down. The other points on the way down (not saying we reach all of them) is 82, 68 and 60. Maybe low 50's but I think the buying won't let that happen, too many people want it. Depending on how long the downward movement goes on, I'd "guess" the $68 region is more likely, we'll have to see how people react.
Any chance of teasing an explanation from you...?
When I traded many years ago I was almost exclusively a candlestick guy. Well, I started going through the old "crash" last night and comparing it to the new one. I broke the chart down into an hourly one (and there abouts) and focussed on some of the key volume spikes on the move down. But, I also was looking at the formation of the old (2011) bubble and what was interesting is that on the way up, there was a disturbance in the smooth rise, and on the way down that disturbance clearly acted as support. So, instead focussing on the move down (which I looked closely at) I was also trying to correlate things to the move up. In a way, you can call it like an expected "mirror approach". The current bubble is not quite as pronounced, but just observe the chart and look for these mirror spots. I'm not saying it will work, but it doesn't really disagree with the move downs support levels. I did some eyeball averaging as well and it all seemed to add up. The bounces are quite predictable (but I'm not really a trader per say). That is the short of it.