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 : Dave Gore's Trades That Make Sense -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Vet who wrote (8628)	6/25/2002 12:09:10 AM
From: Raymond Duray	Respond to of 16631

Re: I am not a TA expert but this looks a bit unhealthy to me... In what sense? The NAM finds the change refreshing and useful.

To: The Vet who wrote (8628)	6/25/2002 1:18:39 AM
From: Dave Gore	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 16631

Vet, actually it looks like a reverse head and shoulders. We could actually see a rally in USD. However, the problem is the consumer confidence. It could be turning weaker still and if the Market wants to interpret it as negative, it will override T/A anyway.

To: The Vet who wrote (8628)	6/25/2002 3:53:48 AM
From: milesofstyles	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 16631

i disagree that this is an inverted head and shoulders. chartwerx.com in fact, if you look at the orange dotted line, that may be a double top. measuring its distance it projects a target of 104 which you can see a longer term support is moving into. you can also see the red horizontal that is coinciding with the 200 movavg you posted on your chart. this would be 2 reasons for a bounce if it were to happen, not bcuz of an inverted head and shoulders pattern. i just don't see one. a bounce would likely retest either the lost uptrend or back up to the orange horizontal. on another note,(and thread) i was hoping to get some follow thru on the esr insights being talked about on this thread and trendsetters. i didn't get a response so here's what i have got on esr... the debt to equity ratio is 3.47, this is based on lt debt of 765 and equity of 220. now examine the equity and book value, total assets are 1863.22, subtract from that liabilities, 1347.26, preferred shares, 295, and intangible assets, 795. thus, the equity is a joke. there is none. its a bloated intangible account that appears to give this company a book value of 3.00+, its book value is less than 0 based on the fact they do not have any real equity when book value is calculated properly. basically, it appears this company took on a large amount of debt that transfers directly to its intangible account. i would suggest people not rely on figures from internet sites, yahoo matches market guide's and zack's. however, i feel them all to be incorrectly calculated. pull the numbers off the statements and calculate them by hand. book value Definition 1 A company's common stock equity as it appears on a balance sheet, equal to total assets minus liabilities, preferred stock, and intangible assets such as goodwill. milesov