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.

Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kevin Podsiadlik who wrote (123908)	4/20/2001 11:58:09 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

kevin, so you are saying that the yahoo charts only adjusted the price splits and not the volume as represented in the chart? that is illogical. it makes no sense since the charts are related. if you are right, and i don't think you are, then your point is well taken. let me ask you this. when i look at split points on the chart, i see examples where the volume post split is less than pre split. feb 1996 and jan 1998 are 2 examples. if your assertion was correct, volume was actually more than cut in half almost over night. this doesn't sound reasonable to me. so given the choice between a rank amateur, barely meaningful volume chart coupled with volumes cut in half almost over night (post split) or a chart that is put together reasonably and rationally, i'll go with the latter. i may be wrong, but i really don't think so. take another look at the chart. it says csco traded for nearly a dime in 1992. we know it never traded for a literal dime. that dime represents tthe cost given today's dilution. it is the same with the volume. 1 share traded in 1992 is given 72 times the weighting and still doesn't even show up on the chart. why? most people buy high.