SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : MARKET INDEX TECHNICAL ANALYSIS - MITA -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: J.T. who wrote (12427)5/28/2002 2:17:18 AM
From: High Country Trader  Read Replies (4) | Respond to of 19219
 
J.T., I believe the net balance index hit a record back in 1974 when during a 47 week period (February - December) there was net buying in 44 weeks. The net buying that occurred in late 1995 (not 1994) was the next great buying splurge by the members. In late 1994 it was the consecutive weeks of public shorting over specialists that was the trigger. Back in late 1994 though most all the sentiment indicators (such as Investors Intelligence) were confirming the positive data from the members report. Also, since 2000, the net balance index has been mostly positive week after week. Two weeks ago I posted in another newsgroup that the net balance index was positive 37 of 52 weeks in 2000 with an average net weekly buy of 13,773.807. Last year it was positive 23 of the 30 weeks with a net weekly buy of 29,085,366 before the humongous net selling began in August.
This year it had been positive 13 of 17 weeks ( I guess it's now 15/19 weeks) with a net weekly buy of 37,868,705 shares. More significant for the bulls is every week this year has seen more public selling than specialist. I agree with you the ingredients are there for a major blastoff. But not sure that blastoff will occur before there is more bearish sentiment coming from Investors Intelligence, more insider buying (which I'm told hit its lowest reading in 10 years on an eight week moving average) and the commercials net long the S&P futures. Regardless, if a blastoff occurs I would think it should be accompanied by either a momentum day of extraordinary up/down volume on the NYSE or Nasdaq or 10 days where the cumulative advance/decline ratio is greater than 2 to 1.



To: J.T. who wrote (12427)5/29/2002 1:04:43 AM
From: ahhaha  Read Replies (5) | Respond to of 19219
 
The public continues to do the work of the specialists shorting stock week after week non-stop since the first week in January.

Quite correct and corroborated by every trade money flow done across all markets. The flow - price divergence is the greatest ever measured. Money flow bottomed in April '01 and has been rising at an ever steeper slope ever since. The only similar degree of divergence occurred between Sept. '81 and Aug. '82, but that earlier version pales in comparison to what has developed since 4/01.

A massive short squeeze - the greatest of all time is in the brewing.

Quite correct and at this point, unavoidable. The squeeze will occur on an opening gap where many of the large cap NAZ will not be able to be opened for days. It will be driven by the $trillions held short by 6000 hedge funds trying to avoid disaster. I estimate that NAZ is 700 points below where it would be commensurate with net flow and so the gap should be about 700 points. Accordingly, for example, CSCO would open around 25.

The up move in the late '90s was a fraud, no doubt, a fraud built on the deceit of 'crats waging war on wealth, but operating beyond their domain has been a revolution in productivity which has persisted for so long that it can no longer be ignored. The fraud rightly produced the major upside structural break out for the wrong reasons. The stock market is always wrong. The stock market corrected itself. It pulled back to the break out point in the greatest shake-out in history. It had to shake out all the thieves and rid itself of the unworthy. You have to be long, and hold, and suffer, to be worthy and to make money.