Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : MDA - Market Direction Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (19798)	7/10/1999 4:08:00 AM
From: Berney	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 99985

Haim, I know you are not excited about this market. However, you really should go back and look at the weekly and monthly OEX trading channel since 1994. It really is a pretty picture! There is an FA reason for this. I show the weekly lower channel line about 18% below where we are now. History says we will hit it at least once this year. It is not a negative; only the natural order of things. History also says that if we break below it, the PPT will step in to assume damage control, assuming the powers that be want the next election to proceed normally. We can rant and rave about the PE valuations, but this market lost that luster IMHO last year. It is now all about liquidity! Not really surprising; typical supply/demand stuff. Well, let's see. I show the top (for the year) about 2% above us and the bottom 18% below us. This certainly does not represent a great risk/reward ratio, which probably reflects my tendency towards cash all week. I'm now looking at the entry point to Jim's bear funds. Time for bed! Berney

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (19798)	7/10/1999 11:34:00 AM
From: Stephen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 99985

Haim, maybe someone is paying attention ?? Barron's on Yahoo from Abe's column: What really got us mumbling on this was Yahoo's release of its quarterly earnings last week, which, the company's bullish claque proclaimed, had beat the estimates. After perusing the release and mulling the plasticity of the pro-forma contrivance, we were equally puzzled by (a) how anyone could make an earnings estimate in the first place; and (b) how any financial officer of the most modest competence could fail to beat it. Pro forma, Yahoo reported second-quarter earnings of 11 cents a share, compared with a penny a share in the year-earlier period. However, when you add in the merger costs and amortization of goodwill of this very busy acquirer, earnings disappear, replaced by a loss of seven cents a share, down from eight cents a share. Actually, the red ink flowed more abundantly than those figures suggest. For while it suffered a net loss of $15 million versus $14 million, the company in its June quarter this year benefited from a $3 million tax credit; by contrast, its 1998 June quarter was burdened by a tax charge of roughly that amount. Put another way, before taxes, Yahoo lost $18 million this year versus $11 million last year. Which neatly illustrates why Yahoo and its fans -- and so many of its Internet kith and kin -- cherish pro forma. For in earnings, like virtually everything else about these companies, illusion, not the real thing, is what counts. The last word on bubbles. Stephen