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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Monty Lenard who wrote (121474)	8/2/2000 10:47:08 AM
From: Elmer	Respond to of 1575354

Re: "No it is not going to be good because I don't need to make a case" I knew you couldn't, I just wanted to see your excuse. Re: "How bout you making a case for buying AMD at 95" Sorry but I don't think I could possibly justify it. EP

To: Monty Lenard who wrote (121474)	8/2/2000 2:47:30 PM
From: Eric K.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575354

Monty-- These, I presume, are your postings on the Lucent gap: siliconinvestor.com You, however, provided no such analysis on this thread. I, and a few others, basically said technicians and their "art" are fluff. You then responded with a rant about the orgasmic speculativeness that makes people totally unwilling to accept the possibility that (a) their stock is a dog and (b) stocks can plummet in value. The very high levels of bullishness among individual investors does not seem to have a correlation with the statement, "AMD has a gap to fill in the $40s." The premise of your Lucent posts is, correct me if I'm wrong, that Lucent gapped down due to bad news, and then gapped up on superficially good news which concealed, to naive investors anyway, the bad news. Hence, the stock had to gap down on a technical basis due to a misconstruing of a fundamental fact. Given that there has been a whole lot of new news since the original gapping sequence, I fail to see why the stock has to "fill" a gap at a particular price, rather than just having a relative percentage drop at whatever price it has risen to to adjust for the gap which occurred due to a false analysis of the fundamentals. Regardless, I don't see the gap down/gap up sequence that characterizes the Lucent moves in October and March in AMD's February/March activity. If you would like to make an argument, please make it about AMD, rather than assuming that everyone to whom you are speaking is an idiot for not intuitively knowing whatever your overall chain of thought is. -Eric