To: minorejoy2000 who wrote (34512 ) 11/1/2000 6:24:22 AM From: Doo Read Replies (4) | Respond to of 42787 minorejoy2000: I've been tracking O'Neill's price and volume signals for 6 plus years. They are mechanical and easy to follow, at least on the bottoming signals. 3 years ago, I had to cancel my subscription to IBD, however, because of waffling, hedging comments like the one's set out in this article you post. They are clearly trying to sell papers and cavallierly change the counts, calls, etc. to avoid committing one way or another, IMO. The count goes like this. Yesterday was not day 4, it was day 9 for the COMPX. It was the second 1% on volume move off the 10/18 low, although I must say I like the comment that they want to see 1.5% in price. So, make it one 1.5% on volume day confirming the 10/18 low. NDX made a lower low since 10/18 (which would make yesterday day #3), but you can't find volume for that index. My opinion is that the article you posted calls yesterday day 4 for one simple reason. It gives IBD 6 more days to see further price and volume confirmation of the day they've chosen to count from (not the true low). Simple fact is, the article is bunk. COMPX, SPX, NYSE and INDU confirmed the low and the call is easy......IT upturn is signalled. Sentiment indicators got pretty extreme, except IIA (although it showed the most bearish reading I can recall since 10/99). This type of signal has been failing at a much higher rate than the 20% IBD touts in the past 2 years. Thus, IBD's hedge, change of rules, fudging of the counts. IMO, you are much better off reading WON's books, and doing the work yourself. Under the count, yesterday (at latest) marked the low. Now, let's see if it works. Simple, right? Well, apparently not if you're selling papers.