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.

Technology Stocks : Alliance Semiconductor -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: AJ Berger who wrote (5677)	7/31/1999 11:21:00 PM
From: Ken Muller	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9582

Al: <<We are in a brave new world for ASLC and no repeat of that ridiculous '95 run now.>> If UMC performs as I think they will, a repeat of the stock run in 95 is quite reasonable. BTW, I will vote NO on any increase in stock authorization.

To: AJ Berger who wrote (5677)	8/1/1999 12:12:00 PM
From: kevin rundblad	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9582

<"whoever thinks some arcane pattern noticed in 1994 trading has any bearing in 1999 really should not be playing this stock."> The point that price movement is very similar to sept/oct 94 is purely descriptive from the technical analysis viewpoint, and should be put in the context of other factors. Of course we all know that you cannot just rely on a chart, and it would be unwise to think that the stock will move in such an exaggerated manner. But then again, why spurn technical information that can be understood in the broader context? Why do historical patterns tend to reoccur in the market? The famous economist F. A. Hayek recognized just that point--that price is in fact, an indicator. While there is the very important point of the core business that we can analyze in the present, the "invisible hand" of the market should also be observed. We do not have perfect knowledge of the future... Pardon my divergence into economics.