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 : Bob Brinker: Market Savant & Radio Host -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Adam Smith who wrote (13499)	4/5/2001 1:33:11 PM
From: Kirk ©	Respond to of 42834

It's gutsy in my book to post this type of info to a hostile audience. Yeah, I agree. Since Bob stopped talking about market internals on his show and relies mostly on "rogue phone calls" that "slip through" the screeners offering "thanks for getting us out of the market" or "thanks for your bulletins" to convince people he has a clue what he is talking about and that his MT offers value, many have had to look for OTHER places to find this type of market information. Not all have time to listen to CNBC or read message boards all day so David fills a recent vacuum. Funny how Bob cuts his nose off to spite his face and creates a NEW market for David's research. I'm ROTFLMAO at it.

To: Adam Smith who wrote (13499)	4/5/2001 1:41:37 PM
From: Boca_PETE	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

Adam Smith: I see. However, the methodology he is displaying has constantly failed despite the appearance of many daily instances of positive divergences since the NAZ 2800. Do these other services you refer to compare current internals to the internals on the day of the first previous low ? Or do they compare to the internals on the last previous low made on huge volume ? I use the latter benchmark. Positive divergences depend upon the benchmark being compare to. It seems to me that no matter what benchmark was used the last six months, we've gotten new low after new low. Thus the market is not responding in accordance with past experience. Also, it seems to me that while April 4 volume is lower than April 3, it's not materially lower. I don't see how very slightly lower volume is particularly meaningful as a sign that selling is drying up. Summing up, I see a lot of noted telemetry in the post and a guy groping to figure out a proper interpretation of it. I'm not knocking the effort. I'm just saying it appears we are all groping in the dark to understand what has gone wrong, when will the turning point occur, and will any rally therefrom only be a temporary prelude to an even worse down draft during capitulation or the start of a new bull market. FWIW P