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: Rock_nj who wrote (48754)	4/30/2000 11:24:00 PM
From: Stcgg	Respond to of 99985

Re> Naz.. "If you want to see how far the NASDAQ has gotten ahead of itself, look at this long term chart. bigcharts.com Almost straight up until the recent correction." Notice the volume after the correction, it's much higher than during the vertical runup.. Also, the steepness of the correction should prevent any further downdrafts.. I bot like crazy on Monday, Apr 17th at Naz 3210! >><<

To: Rock_nj who wrote (48754)	5/1/2000 1:35:00 AM
From: miklosh	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 99985

No wonder. The chart you present is linear along its y axis, so the growth rate will appear parabolic at a glance. It needs to be log scale in order to present rate of growth expressed as a percentage.In other words, the difference between 100 and 200 along the the vertical axis should be the same as the distance between 10,000 and 20,000, since both cases represent a 100% rise. This chart presents a realistic picture of the naz's true rate of growth. finance.yahoo.com^IXIC&d=my Notice that from naz 400 right up to last Fridays close, the RATE of growth is actually fairly linear. If you were to superimpose a straight line from 400 to 4000 , you would not see too much divergence on either side of the line.The slope does however pickup from 3-5k. And there is a bias toward accelerating growth over time, which is shown by the slope gradually increasing. If all this is obvious to you, my apologies. With all due respect, I just do not want anyone to be mislead by the magnitude of growth that the graph that you presented implies. regards