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: Stcgg who wrote (60058)	10/7/2000 2:23:17 PM
From: HairBall	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 99985

Stcgg: I have requested several times for you to honor the following guideline... 07) If you post someone else's commentary you should make that clear in your post by including a link to the original when possible. If links are not possible, make it clear what portion of the post is not yours and give credit to the author. If you include links to graphics (charts/graphs etc) other than your own, you should indicate whose graphics you are linking. DO NOT post in a manner that represents other's work as your own. Regards, LG

To: Stcgg who wrote (60058)	10/7/2000 2:33:46 PM
From: KymarFye	Respond to of 99985

52 wk low theory: Interesting, but you'd think the 3220 area would at least provide a speed bump - April and May low, early Nov 1999 weekly high. Below that, we get the high 2900s - and the Wayback machine takes us full circle to late October and the beginning of the 99-00 Bull move, which already bids fair to qualify as the Great Emily LaTella (or, for younger fans, Nirvana) Rally, as in "Never mind!" It's also, of course, the anniversary of the Great Crash. In other words, if things slow down just a little bit, the high 2900s might end up fulfilling the 52 wk low theory, and wouldn't that be painful, scary, and embarrassing enough? If things slow down a bit more, under that theory a re-test and minor overshoot of 3200 might suffice. On the other hand, to use the kind of thinking that Robbie Stephens is still advertising (and surely helped get us into this mess), it's a new time, full of new possibilities. Or, as Datek still puts it (mainly referring to overnight changes in their margin and short-selling restrictions, I believe): "The rules are changing." So, we can't completely exclude the possibility, especially with help of the exogenous variety, that even heavy congestion in the high 2000s would just make for another speed bump, but otherwise odds would seem to favor a long pause as the market and the world and the Fed take a new look at whatever the heck is really going on by then.

To: Stcgg who wrote (60058)	10/7/2000 3:26:38 PM
From: ahhaha	Respond to of 99985

Small point: The NAZ has never seen a bear market. The last bear market went from Dec '68 to Aug '82. The NAZ is a more recent creation. We used to refer to it as the "OTC", over-the-counter, and was pretty much that until it was formalized in the late '80s. The OTC didn't get a significant tech move until '83 on the heels of the FED driven massive short covering move of '82. I seem to recall that the internal DOW peak occurred on Christmas Eve '68. ps. nice chart and may be quite accurate given the psychology developing here.

To: Stcgg who wrote (60058)	10/7/2000 4:13:37 PM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 99985

Sctgg, I fear I have to disagree with Larry's analysis. Since 1985, more often than not Naz reactions were held well above the then prevailing 52 weeks low. This including the 85 and 86 reactions, the late 89 early 90 reaction, as well as the 92, 96, 97 and 98 reactions. Only in 94 was the reaction really stopped at the 52 weeks low. Actually, when we get real bear moves, more often than not, the Naz will go into an extended period of breaching the 52 weeks lows such as in 87, 90 and even in late 1999. As to the question are we going straight down to the mid 2500 or not, I'll have to see how much "pessimism" is building up. So far during this September decline, we had only one day in which the Naz tic was worse than -1100 (and the NYSE none), not a lot of capitulation yet (we had more negative readings than that by a lot in the late May decline). Personally I expect Monday and/or Tuesday to generate such numbers, and thus mark a local bottom there, but until I see such extremes, I am still very cautious. Zeev