To: diana g who wrote (75227 ) 10/1/2000 2:26:16 PM From: SliderOnTheBlack Respond to of 95453 Gravity & Newton's "Apple".... The failure to support the NASDQ via what has now become near automatic end of quarter "tape painting" and Apple's near cut in half - haircut; for a minor earnings miss is indeed ominous imho. While few would dismiss the compelling possiblity of the OSX to reach 200+ on merely normal historic valuation multiples - I wonder if the market can keep itself together long enough for this Boom 2000-2001 to reach its full potential ? =========================================================== Post by Farfel at www.Gold-Eagle.com Friday, September 29, 2000 Today's action in the Nasdaq must be viewed with a raised eyebrow. It is most extraordinary to think that on a critical "window dressing day" like today, on a day BEFORE the historically ominous month of October, the funds allowed the averages to slip as dramatically as they did. In terms of the Apple announcement, let us face facts: The missed estimates were NOT really such a big deal. I mean, on the scale of bad news, I would rate the Apple disclosure as almost inconsquential relative to what truly constitutes bad news in this world. But in a bear market, ALL bad news is exaggerated and ALL bad news drives the market, while good news is esesntially ignored. So one must conclude that tech is in a fast-developing bear mode, since the Apple disclosure, although disappointing, hardly even fits the category of bad news. Conversely, in a bull market, the good news gets the attention while the bad news is ignored. In the gold market, that is becoming more and more the case. Announcements that historically shattered gold companies (dropping them 25-30 percent in one day) are now no longer treated with much drama, no matter how hard the anti-gold establishment works to create fear. We seem to have arrived at a point where certain bearish announcements in the gold-mining sector are not regarded with great horror (for example, Third World nations selling gold; analyst downgrades; gold mine closures.) Instead there seems to be a new spin developing, one characteristic of a market undergoing quiet accumulation. So, for example, when we learn of Uruguay selling gold, the new savvy perception is that First World nations striving to keep the gold price suppressed are forced "to scrape the bottom of the barrel" and find any small country that can be bamboozled/intimidated into gold sales or leases. So, for example, when we learn that some analyst at J.P. Morgan downgrades a gold stock, we are not particularly concerned, since we know that Morgan's credibility is falling given that its tech stock recommendations have been very far off the mark. But even more notably, we know about Morgan's enormous short derivatives position in the gold market, utilized to suppress the gold price after the Washington Agreement. So, again, savvy investors know full well the blatant conflict of interest among the major analysts, and naturally scoff at their gold-mining company downgrades, which are issued either for the purposes of accumulation or gold market suppression. So, for example, when we learn of gold mine closures, we know that such techniques have been used historically within the mining sector to knock down stock prices solely for the purposes of accumulation by savvy big investors. Moreover, savvy goldbugs know that reduced mine supply can only create much added pressure for the gold shorts to find sufficient supply to meet the annual global gold demand, now far exceeding global mining supply. When the gold price suppression scheme collapses, as it must eventually, the explosion in gold price will more than cover a gold mining company's reduced output from the shutdown of high-cost mines -- provided, of course, that such a gold company is largely unhedged with respect to its remaining production. -END-