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 : Trader J's Inner Circle -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LTK007 who wrote (43402)	5/22/2001 8:08:23 PM
From: JustTradeEm	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 56537

Definite rally material for tomorrow .... SOURCE: Semiconductor Equipment and Materials International North American Semiconductor Equipment Industry Posts April 2001 Book-to-Bill Ratio of 0.42 SAN JOSE, Calif., May 22 /PRNewswire/ -- The North American-based manufacturers of semiconductor equipment posted $711.8 million in orders in April 2001 and a book-to-bill ratio of 0.42, according to the April 2001 Express Report published today by Semiconductor Equipment and Materials International (SEMI). A book-to-bill of 0.42 means that $42 worth of new orders were received for every $100 of product shipped for the month. The three-month average of worldwide bookings in April 2001 was $711.8 million. The bookings figure is 41 percent below the revised March 2001 level of $1.20 billion and 74 percent below the $2.72 billion in orders posted in April 2000. The three-month average of worldwide shipments in April 2001 was $1.68 billion. The shipments figure is 17 percent below the revised March 2001 level of $2.03 billion but is 15 percent above the April 2000 shipments level of $1.99 billion. ``The severity and depth of this industry correction is unprecedented,'' said Stanley T. Myers, president and CEO of SEMI. ``The book-to-bill ratio is the lowest that the industry has posted in the past decade and reflects the sharp order decline in April 2001. Cancellations of previously reported orders for semiconductor manufacturing equipment were a significant contributor to the monthly bookings decline as worldwide chip manufactures make adjustments to bring capacity and inventory in line with demand.'' The SEMI book-to-bill is a ratio of three-month moving average bookings to three-month moving average shipments for the North American semiconductor equipment industry. Shipments and bookings figures are in millions of U.S. dollars. Shipments Bookings Book-to-Bill November 2000 2,422.4 2,707.3 1.12 December 2000 2,389.5 2,372.3 0.99 January 2001 2,308.4 1,854.2 0.80 February 2001 (final) 2,279.3 1,610.9 0.71 March 2001 (rev.) 2,026.4 1,203.5 0.59 April (prelim.) 1,684.5 711.8 0.42 The data contained in this release was compiled by the independent public accounting firm of Arthur Andersen LLP, without audit, from data submitted directly by the participants. SEMI and Arthur Andersen LLP can assume no responsibility for the accuracy of the underlying data. The data are contained in a monthly Express Report published by SEMI that tracks shipments and orders worldwide of North American-based manufacturers of equipment used to manufacture semiconductor devices, not shipments and orders of the chips themselves. The May 2001 Express Report is scheduled for publication on June 21, 2001 (subject to change). Based in San Jose, Calif., SEMI is an international trade association serving more than 2,400 companies participating in the semiconductor and flat panel display equipment and materials markets. SEMI maintains offices in Austin, Beijing, Boston, Brussels, Hsinchu, Moscow, Seoul, Singapore, Tokyo and Washington, D.C. For more information, visit SEMI on the Internet at www.semi.org. SOURCE: Semiconductor Equipment and Materials International

To: LTK007 who wrote (43402)	5/22/2001 9:31:48 PM
From: ajtj99	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 56537

Max, the low on January 23 was 58.57 on the VXN, and that was a 20% drop in the 20EMA on the VXN. The 40's are not as critical to me as the divergence. It is just too uncanny that it happened twice in a row the same way. Nancy did elaborate what the divergence meant by insinuating that it preceeded two steep drop-offs in the COMPX in September and February. Her response to you did nothing to dispute that earlier post, but it did not give any further insight either. I still look at the original divergence and believe it has significance. Les looks more at the crossing of the 20-EMA over the 50-EMA, but I can't see any kind of good pattern for predicting the market from those events. Nancy's is as close as I've seen to getting any significance from the divergence. We'll see what happens, but I've got to respect where lightning has struck twice. Remember that guy who got struck 8-times? They said it wasn't possible. Oh, well, I guess I'm just getting incoherent now.