September 11, 2001 trading

Discussion in 'Trading' started by drukes1234, Feb 4, 2006.

  1. I was on vacation in that September, away from any computers until the 26th of September. I've always been curious because I obviously never experienced what the trading was like on the 11th. What was the series of events with the S&P futs? I talked to one trader I used to work with and he said obviously the futures sold off hard on the news, then there were reports that it was just a small cesna and the markets rallied... then pictures of the towers hit the air and the market sold off hard. Also what time did the exchange land out shutting down? I'm just very interested in what the course of events were.

  2. If anyone can post the S&P/Dow chart for 09/11/2001 that would be great as well.
  3. Market never opened for regular session. Hit about 9.15 eastern time. Premarket.

  4. Pre-market chart if possible would be great-- but I just wanted to know how the futures trading played out that morning. I can imagine the pits were absolutely insane.
  5. I was trading QQQ pre-market when the first plane struck. Initially, the event was reported as an explosion, so the selloff was not that dramatic (I believe the Q's went from 33's to 32's). By the time the second plane struck, they were down at least three points, and then trading was halted.
  6. I know it's not what you were asking about, but I will say we will never know what really happened on Sep't 11, 2001.

    I do not embrace conspiracy theories but I have to say that the evidence that casts doubt on the official version of what brought the twin towers down is beginning to convince me. The physics and engineering do not add up -- a jet airplane, loaded with jet fuel, simply does not have enough mass and energy to cause a highly redundant steel superstructure to collapse on itself and fall vertically to the ground below. The burning jet fuel doesn't explain it either, it burns nearly 1,000 degrees cooler than the melting point of steel. In fact, there have been skyscraper fires that consumed more floors than the WTC fires, and those buildings remained standing after the fires were extinguished.

    If you ever get a chance to handle a small piece of airplane fuselage, you will reach the same conclusion. The skin of a plane is basically a honeycomb of thin, light aluminum and composite materials. Jetliners are very fragile and have to be operated within narrow flight specifications to balance the forces of the air, gravity and engines; they really are just flying eggshells. Imagine throwing a raw egg at a bird cage -- I don't care how fast the egg goes, the cage isn't going to collapse completely on itself.

    And I won't get into the fact that airline pilots generally say that Cessna training isn't enough to learn how to fly a modern jetliner with enough precision to hit either the WTC towers or the Pentagon.

    I'm not going to speculate who or what caused the demolition of the WTC after the airplanes struck. I only have enough facts to conclude there was a controlled demolition. Whether or not the demolition was tied to a greater "plan" that involved the financial markets, I don't know and I doubt any of us ever will.
  7. patoo


    1. Sounds like you are embracing it to me

    2. if you throw an eggshell at a building fast enough, you can put a hole in the building...basic physics. Try jumping off a high bridge into water. It hurts. Same idea.

    3. The towers were constructed differently than most skyscrapers. The architects never planned on a jetliners being aimed at the towers loaded with gasoline. Saw the program on A&E. I guess the architects and A & E were in on it too.
  8. patoo


    but I digress....

    here is the es on 9.1.2001. Is that what you wanted?
  9. 2. Yes, at extremely high supersonic speeds (rifle speeds or higher) its possible for anything to punch a hole through a building. These planes were flying low and slow -- maybe 200 mph.

    3. A&E could simply be wrong without being part of some conspiracy. In numerous wire reports, the engineers and architects of the WTC said that the towers were in fact designed to take a 707 hit.

    And why did the third building, WTC-7, collapse on its own when it wasn't struck by a plane at all?
  10. Thanks for the chart! That's uhhh.... a selloff to say the least
    #10     Feb 4, 2006