Steve,
>>>> .... I read that 50% of NASDAQ's daily volume is non-institutional versus 20% of NYSE's daily volume.
I'm seeing signs that the bigger players are shifting out of technologies and internets. Since many of the J6P investor are trading on margin, the combination of the bigger players rotating out and current prices supported in part by credit is asking for trouble.
What recent indications are there that when the market suffer a downturn that small investors panicked? <<<<<
I think legitimate arguements could be made for and against panick selling by the small investor.
The previous selloff in the NAZ was 11% in only 4 days, which is far
from small and definitely far from being slow, and I believe one of those days was the NAZ 2nd worse day in history and may have been in the top 5 on a percentage basis, so I believe there were some who were starting to panic.
On the other hand, the NAZ rebounded sharply to set a new high, which could mean that a sustained panic selloff may not occur since there are so many BUY-THE-DIPPERs, so whenever there is a some panic selling, it may be met with panic buying. Unfortunately there is a negative side to that also, and that is if lower lows and lower highs are produced it could be a long and much more painful downtrend in the long run.
Im not saying there will be a huge selloff now, but a panic selloff maybe better than a sustained slow selling process if the selloff in both senerios are the same is size.
1987 was a good example of panic selling, where the market lost 22% in a short period, but that was it for the selling and the market recoverd in over a year. In the 70's the market systematically sold off producing lower lows and lower highs, and in the end the market dropped about 40% and lasted much longer than the 87 selloff.
Again, I an not saying that right now should be equated to those 2
examples, but just trying to show the difference in a panic selloff
vs. a systematic selloff.
seeya
|
