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: Tom Tallant who wrote (63006)	11/22/2000 9:49:16 PM
From: Petrol	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 99985

Tom, With all due respect, I come to Rob S's defense. He is correct. <<<<Let me ask you a question. What technology did you use to come to that conclusion? Something on the internet? A MSFT program? Something American? Something dependent on growth and funding? Something that you are able to use because of the very optimism you so flipantly dismiss?>>> My answer, if i may provide my own answer, is this: 1. The technology he used to come to that conclusion could have included some or all of mathematics, earnings, pe ratios, forward pe's, PEG ratios, fundamental analysis and technical analysis, national economic conditions, world economic conditions, currency valuations, war, price of crude oil, employment, GDP, bank loan debt, margin debt, mortgage loans, and so on. 2. Hmm. perhaps he DID use prepared numbers provided on the internet for these conclusions. 3. It quite possibly could have been a MSFT program, or 4. It quite possibly could have been an American site. (he really could have used a foreign site (gasp), as numbers are easily translated. 5. Something dependent on growth and funding? WHAT? I don't understand this comment. 6. Once again, I don't understand this comment. Further, you say: <<<It is absolutely amazing to me that posters write this kind of tripe and yet continue to use the very things they would like to destroy. What about INSP? Would you prefer they went belly-up? How would you possibly be able to spread such negatives if you did?>>>> I'm once again, not sure what you mean by these statements; however, I am obligated to state that ALL overvaluation bubbles have popped and the strongest companies survive. Some die, some evolve, and some struggle for years before business models are adjusted so that earnings come in line with valuations. Former historical bubbles: Tulips South Sea American Stock Market 1929 Technology Bubble of the 1960's Nikkei Stock Market 2000 Nasdaq Stock Market Some companies deserve to go belly-up. Some don't. Many technology issues needed an adjustment downward of valuations and corporate shake-outs so that the market can be healthy. Respectfully, Stickupman

To: Tom Tallant who wrote (63006)	11/23/2000 3:35:08 PM
From: Rob S.	Respond to of 99985

This is just my opinion from my observations of the technical deterioration of the charts and how each sector in succession has traded over the past several months. Prices for the market as a whole are cheap but for particularly well loved stocks they are still very high. "Normal" valuations over the entire history of the stock market have tended to adjust high growth expectations for the margin of risk that these rates can be achieved or sustained. The market for the most inflated (or you might say most attractive) sectors continues to value stocks with too little consideration of potential upsets caused by economic slowing or increased competitive pressures. In any case, the market votes with dollars. Buy if stocks are moving up, sell and go to cash or sell short if they are moving down. Arguing about it or wishful thinking won't change the way the market goes. There are significant opportunities for trading stocks both to the upside and the downside in this highly emotional market. The best loved stocks tend to bounce violently off of support levels and crash off of resistance levels. Stay loose, study the charts, have fun and prosper.