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 : Stock Attack II - A Complete Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lee Lichterman III who wrote (5753)	4/13/2001 8:21:44 AM
From: Lee Lichterman III	Respond to of 52237

OT Sometime soon I will be having my name changed here. I went by L3_aka_L3 since in the early days of the internet, it was untrusted and the use of aliases was common sense to keep weirdos from doing identity theft etc. Now that it is trusted a bit more, I will be using my real name here and have requested that SI Jeff use my real name. Once that kicks in I will be Lee Lichterman III FWIW, My middle initial is also L thus my initials are LLL and I am the third which is why my old alias was L3 aka L3. -ggg- Good Luck, Lee

To: Lee Lichterman III who wrote (5753)	4/13/2001 8:56:52 AM
From: JRI	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 52237

Any thoughts appreciated (all)... COMPX: I see a lot of congestion in the 1980-2000 area....also a gap at 2000-2025 (or so), and I calculated a 33% retrace move of the 1623 bottom (33% equalling the % retrace that occurred from 2261-2890 Jan. move from the Sept-Jan downleg)... Also, if A=C on this 5 wave up move, then C = (approx.) 150 pts......so 1870 (approx. bottom yesterday) + 150= 2020.... 1980 2000 2020 2025 2041 Any of those numbers appeal to you? Above that, we get back in the '90 COMPX Log channel...i would think that'll be a bear (pun intended) to break... Finally, if we do pullback Monday ("bear trap")...how much downside are you looking for? Does Max-Pain figure in (any way) to your ideas about end of week...also, any thoughts on 23rd turn date appreciated...

To: Lee Lichterman III who wrote (5753)	4/13/2001 9:19:19 AM
From: JRI	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 52237

Any more thoughts, anyone, appreciated! (Last one, I promise) To:AllansAlias who wrote (93794) From: JRI Friday, Apr 13, 2001 9:18 AM Respond to of 93799 Final question on thoughts (I promise)! Looking back at the November rally, and the January rally.... I looked at 7 top (former) "high-flyers" (BRCM, ITWO, CHKP, BEAS, SEBL, JNPR, CIEN) and the Soxx and BTK... I wanted to measure % moves from daily low to daily high.. For those 7 stocks mentioned, for November, the range was from 53% (JNPR) to 79% (CHKP), and for January, from 43% (JNPR) to 74% (CIEN).... Since the up move started Wednesday a week ago, the range is 63.25% (CIEN) to 95% (BEAS)... So, already, this move has equaled the moves in November and January on a % basis for the high-flyers.. The other interesting point was that, for the most part, at around 80 %, the moves seems to end (exception being BEAS move recently)....most of the moves were in the 60-70% range.....as said, we are already there (this go round) for all of the "high-flys" mentioned.... In November, Soxx moved around 36%, low-to-high....and in Jan. around 27%....so far, its been a 31% move (approx.) In November, BTK moved about 27%, low-to-high....and in January, around 35%.....this time around, approx. 25%.. ---------------------------------------------- Conclusions: Looks like this move should peter out soon, if indeed it is of the nature of the 2 previous corrective moves.....the Soxx could run maybe a little further, and the BTK too...but not much....The highflyers have already made an enormous move..... If we go much above the % moves (for the previous corrections), it would raise questions like: Are we correcting something bigger than the downmove from Jan.? Are, perhaps, 5 waves down now complete....and we are only in the A of a A-B-C correction (Sept.- March), etc... Any thoughts appreciated....(Question again: Wouldn't %'s be more valid than absolute numbers here?)