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: bruceleroy1_- who wrote (14599)	8/10/2001 3:08:56 PM
From: jeffsthoughts	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 52237

Because the traders at the same firms as the "experts" know they are a bunch of idiots. A lot of people think that the traders and analysts are in cahoots. Perhaps the analysts don't even have a clue that they are being used by the real money making part of their firms (Banking / Trading). The traders probably view the analysts as stupid geeks the way everybody here views J6P, and simply fades their calls as a matter of course.

To: bruceleroy1_- who wrote (14599)	8/10/2001 3:19:15 PM
From: TechTrader42	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 52237

The CNBS pundits keep stressing that there can be big breakouts from low-volume markets that have been moving sideways. They often hint at a rally to come. With complacency so high and with failed support levels, what kind of breakout do you think we'll see longer term? Take a look at the weekly VIX and VXN, for example? What do they suggest to you -- that the markets are oversold and that we're going to see a breakout to the upside? But whatever. I don't care which direction the markets go. I just find some of the predictions to be somewhat preposterous. A lot of wishful thinking disguised as TA. What about those e-wave predictions that the Naz would hit 2800 by August 1 (2001, I assume)? We just move on to the next predictions, I suppose. Those predictions account for why e-waves are correct only 99.9% of the time, I suppose.