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 : PairGain Technologies -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Doug R who wrote (34826)	11/22/1999 2:34:00 AM
From: DWCraig	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 36349

Doug R., I am trying to follow you. I've studied a few charts in my time and your IL/ACT reminds me of an article I read once in TA of Stocks & Commodities. The person who wrote that article was using a pitchfork, I believe. Your last post says that the "IL is shown to be a line that defines extremely high expectations right back where it's constructed. The short term technical profile of the stock when it hits the high that's used is....how can I say....overcooked." Okay, then, according to this criterion PAIR was 'overcooked' on 5/17/95 and again more recently on 9/29/99 (the dates you provided). Please take a look at the charts I posted. Maybe it's a matter of taste, but PAIR sure doesn't look overcooked on those dates. A little parboiled, perhaps, but certainly not frothy in either instance. The day of the Hoke hoax showed some irrational exuberance, and the rally to 16 1/8 last May might qualify as overbought, but the 9/29 high is tame in comparison, and hardly 'overcooked'. Likewise, the high you use in 1995, May 17, is couched below a trend line drawn between two adjacent peaks: again, not exactly overcooked. I hope you don't mind me asking these questions. As you will most certainly agree, clarity is a virtue in TA, where so much confusion reigns. Please take the time to answer the questions I asked on my last post. I do appreciate your input. Thanks.