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 : Zeev's Turnips - No Politics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Freep who wrote (81055)	6/18/2002 10:15:02 PM
From: DebtBomb	Respond to of 99280

Thanks Freep, no, I'm not even short, no short positions overnight. I don't know what they did with futures, but the way semis and chips sold from AMD, I think this stuff goes down. ORCL, AMD, CIEN, AAPL, can't be ignored IMO, it's bad news no matter how they try to spin it. No matter, we'll see what happens when the rest of the warnings hit anyway. Thanks. ;-)

To: The Freep who wrote (81055)	6/18/2002 10:21:39 PM
From: t2	Respond to of 99280

Freep, That is what has been puzzling; the afterhours quotes I saw on a lot of Naz names showed significant drops from 4PM closes...yet the QQQ were basically around 28.35 approximately the level they held at 4Pm. I just wonder if one could have made some big bucks by shorting the QQQs...and loading up on the biggest components of the Nasdaq100 at the same time. Such opportunities are not supposed to happen in this market but I wonder if this was an exception. That is another reason to be interested in tomorrow's open. Seemed very odd to me.

To: The Freep who wrote (81055)	6/18/2002 10:30:24 PM
From: DebtBomb	Respond to of 99280

It looks like Nasdaq futures opened at 1157, last 1140, down 35, so fair value must be -18, difference is down 17. IMHO. BWTHDIK?? ;-)