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 : High Tolerance Plasticity -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (2193)	3/22/2001 6:25:55 AM
From: chowder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23153

Hello Ed! I'll direct this post to you since you were the last to post here. Lemme see now, Greenspan has lowered the interest rate 50 basis points three times in three months and what do we have to show for it? We have the Naz going lower. The bottom dropping out of the Dow. (Can you say Mad DOW Disease?) CEO's who have no visibility in the coming year, let alone the six month time frame that the market usually prices in. We also have an executive at INTC when asked when he expected things to turn around and he said later rather than sooner. In addition to all this we have analysts who stated the second half of 2001 would be when earnings would improve, then the first half of 2002, and now the second half of 2002. Whew!!! Where does it end? We have the pundits on CNBC who have been ordered to keep things positive. No need to be ordered if things truly were positive. We have the Batman, Abbey and every other mother loving Bull out there defending the market and screaming BUY, BUY, BUY. And the market goes lower. Yesterday Pisani made the statement that the shorts were out in full force again, (I was one of them - VBG). Why would the shorts be out in full force if we were at or near a bottom? This is a puzzlement to me! Tax selling for those who had capital gains, spring time which is usually slow for tech stocks, a Newsweek or Business week poll that claims 71% of those polled believe we will hit a recession and 55% of those polled said the poor economy has forced them to change their spending habits. Where does it all end? I dunno! Had enough? I don't think so, check this out! (Some of you may have already seen this. Source Astrikos.) >> Generally it's a bearish indication when the market closes lower on a day when the Fed cuts rates. Over the last decade this has only happened a handful of times, and in most cases the market was at a lower level one month later. All recent occurrences of a down day in the S&P cash when the Fed cut rates are listed below.. 03/20/01 SPX 1142...one month later ?? 01/31/01 SPX 1366...one month later -9% 03/25/97 SPX 789...one month later -2% 09/04/92 SPX 417...one month later -2% 07/02/92 SPX 411...one month later +3% 10/31/91 SPX 392...one month later -4% 09/13/91 SPX 383...one month later -1% With institutions so heavily short the S&P and small investors stuck long, I tend to expect the market will follow historical precedent and be trading at a lower level come this time next month. Keep in mind that small investors don't have the deep pockets of institutional traders, and can't continue to buy into this down market forever. At some point they'll have to give up, and this could create the panic selloff that will ultimately lead to a real bottom in the market. << I'm in "show me the money" mode. I'll continue to trade the narrow ranges of the stocks I follow and I'll continue to short until it doesn't work anymore. I'll start some long term positions when I start seeing CEO's who finally have some "visibility" as to where they are headed. As far down as the Naz has come, who needs to time the bottom? They'll be plenty of opportunities to make some change to the upside. There's no way the Naz will shoot up to 5000 without backing up and filling the gaps along the way. Trading the range, taking 6-12% ST gains both long and short has been working very well for me of late. I'd just as soon see the volatility stay with us a little longer. Did I mention that I see KREM at 24 sometime in the next six months. Does this make me a visionary? (Har, har, har - just joking ED.) dabum

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (2193)	3/22/2001 9:09:00 AM
From: Evolution	Respond to of 23153

"Over the last decade this has only happened a handful of times, and in most cases the market was at a lower level one month later" Is this a statistically significant observation? Let's see... a handful of times means maximum 5 times, probably only 4 times. Then "most cases" mean "not all cases", so it's got to be 3 times because had it been 2, it would mean a even chance to get one result or the other. So all that this statement is saying is that we saw this result happening once (the time that decided between 3/4 instead of 2/2), therefore it should happen again! Note that his is just an observation on the poor quality of some arguments by commentators; I am not saying one thing or the other will happen… Personally, I don’t have a clue. eV.

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (2193)	3/22/2001 9:55:24 AM
From: Evolution	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23153

"Over the last decade this has only happened a handful of times, and in most cases the market was at a lower level one month later" Is this statistically significant? Let's see... a handful of times means maximum 5 times, probably only 4 times. Then "most cases" means not all cases, so it's got to be 3 times because had it been 2, it would mean a even chance to get one result or the other. So all that this statement is saying is that we saw this result happening once (the time that decided between 3/4 instead of 2/2), therefore it should happen again! Note that his is just an observation on the poor quality of some arguments by commentators; I am not saying one thing or the other will happen… Personally, I don’t have a clue. eV.