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: Zeev Hed who wrote (87738)	6/27/2002 10:05:11 PM
From: ajtj99	Respond to of 99280

Zeev, the January 3 bottom on the COMP was tested to within 2.1% of the low on Jan. 3: table.finance.yahoo.com Jan. 3 low: 2251.71 Jan. 8 low: 2299.65 That's around the 1.5-2% range I'm looking for in the absence of a gap to deal with. The April 4 bottom tested to within 5% of the bottom on the COMP, but within 2-points on the SOXX. Even in pure numbers, the January 2001 bottom was 48 points away while the April bottom was 81 points away. Anyway, we're splitting hairs, and all I'm saying (and you basically agree) is that a re-test normally happens in 3-4 days after the low is in on the COMP. You've mentioned 2-5 days, and that's basically the same range. By no means do I believe this is THE BOTTOM. That is much lower and a bit further down the road. All I'm saying is that for the COMP and NDX, I do not believe today's low was a valid re-test of yesterday's low in spite of the dragonfly doji. The Dow may have had a valid re-test due to the index is going to be dressed up the next couple of days, and it tends to act differently in the bear than the tech indices.

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (87738)	6/27/2002 10:19:39 PM
From: Joe Smith	Respond to of 99280

The strength of the market to bounce back in the face of such bad news shows both short-term strength and long-term denial. Sooner or later we will get the final phase where people are no longer afraid of missing the next rally. Not this time though... Kind of like the CSCO warning in October 2001 which looked like it would cause lower lows but the bounce held.

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (87738)	6/27/2002 11:01:07 PM
From: SOROS	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 99280

People better wake up. Everyone can keep on just "trading stocks" and ignore what's happening, but they will soon be living in an America created out of greed and fraud, and it will not be a pretty picture. Gold is the only "statement investment" which goes against all the crap happening the past few years. I remain, SOROS theage.com.au

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (87738)	6/27/2002 11:13:54 PM
From: Sam	Respond to of 99280

If you can't control 'em, can 'em. sacbee.com Ashcroft removes bankruptcy trustee She's won praise and drawn fire for acting as the public's advocate in the PG&E case. By Claire Cooper -- Bee Legal Affairs Writer Published 2:15 a.m. PDT Wednesday, June 26, 2002 Linda Ekstrom Stanley, the no-nonsense official who has stood up against corporate giants in the Pacific Gas and Electric Co. bankruptcy case, has been removed from office two years before the end of her term under orders by U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft. As regional bankruptcy trustee for eight years, Stanley has been the U.S. Justice Department's official watchdog over bankruptcy cases in Northern and Eastern California and Nevada. She has acted aggressively as the public's advocate, particularly in the 14 months since California's largest utility filed for bankruptcy protection. She attempted to give the utility's ratepayers a voice in the process and opposed giving the utility an exclusive right to draft the plans for its future. She said Tuesday that she was informed of her dismissal "out of the blue" in a phone call late last week. Ashcroft's written order, dated June 18, gave no reason, according to Stanley, who said she didn't know if the action was related to the PG&E case. PG&E had no comment. Dana Perino, a Justice Department spokeswoman, said other trustees have been replaced in the past year, but she was unable to say whether the vacancies occurred through resignation or dismissal. All trustees were informed when Ashcroft took office that "their positions would be reviewed as part of the normal course of business," she said. No successor to Stanley was announced. Some prominent members of the bankruptcy bar said the likely explanation was simply that Stanley is a Democrat in a Republican administration. "Maybe there's some Republican that wants the job," said John Hansen, a former Stanley law partner. However, Jack Williams, scholar in residence at the American Bankruptcy Institute, said, "This is the first trustee that I know of that has essentially been fired" since creation of the office. Although the federal statute establishing the trustee's office gives the attorney general the power to replace any of the nation's 21 regional trustees, Williams said removing one "unless for fraud or embezzlement or things like that" contradicts the intent of Congress in giving trustees five-year terms, a year longer than the president's. Williams, Hansen and others familiar with Stanley's work said she may have attracted negative attention by espousing the view that trustees should protect the public interest and not simply monitor the bankruptcy process. She was "the most high-profile and vocal" advocate of that view in the nation, said Williams. "That's new," he said, adding that "reasonable minds could disagree" on whether the statute allows a U.S. trustee to take on such a role. In that debate, though, Stanley seemed to have the support of the bankruptcy judges in her area. "Generally, my colleagues all agree she was doing what the office was designed to do," said U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali, who sits in San Francisco and presides in the PG&E case. Montali said he sometimes solicited Stanley's recommendations and, while he disagreed with her responses at times, he believed she ran her office at "the highest level of professionalism and integrity." He declined to speculate about the effect of her departure on the PG&E case. Gary Cohen, general counsel of the state Public Utilities Commission, said he "hoped and expected" the trustee's office would continue its active role. Stanley did a good job, he said, of raising issues when the commission held back because of concern that its legal immunity might be jeopardized. The Utility Reform Network issued a statement calling Stanley's dismissal an apparent "political move that will benefit PG&E at consumers' expense." Steven Felderstein, the state's outside counsel in the PG&E case, said Stanley "paid attention to the issues that she thought were going to be important," such as whether the public was well-represented. Richard Heltzel, the bankruptcy court clerk in Sacramento, said Stanley raised the caliber of professionalism in the trustee's office and opened the office to new ways of doing things. "I've loved the job," said Stanley. "I've tried to make a difference. I think I've changed the attitude that people have about the office of the U.S. trustee." Her last day in office will be July 2. Stanley said she'll spend it in Montali's court, where a hearing is scheduled on 21 lawyer and accountant fee applications in the PG&E case. She has filed objections to scores of items, including pay increases of up to $125 an hour for one firm's lawyers.