  In a recent comment (Johansen A 2003 An alternative view, Quant. Finance 3:
C6-C7, cond-mat/0302141), Anders Johansen has criticized our methodology and
has questioned several of our results published in [Sornette D and Zhou W-X
2002 The US 2000-2002 market descent: how much longer and deeper? Quant.
Finance 2: 468-81, cond-mat/0209065] and in our two consequent preprints
[cond-mat/0212010, physics/0301023]. In the present reply, we clarify the
issues on (i) the analogy between rupture and crash, (ii) the Landau expansion,
``double cosine'' and Weierstrass-type solutions, (iii) the symmetry between
bubbles and anti-bubbles and universality, (iv) the condition of criticality,
(v) the meaning of ``bullish anti-bubbles'', (vi) the absolute value of t_c-t,
(vii) the fractal log-periodic power law patterns, (viii) the similarity
between the Nikkei index in 1990-2000 and the S&P500 in 2000-2002 and (ix) the
present status of our prediction.
