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

To: J.T. who wrote (13373)	7/14/2002 11:43:48 AM
From: SGJ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 19219

JT if Im following you correctly then the flip side of your theory is that we should all be shorting the houses, who make the markets. They should be getting near the breaking point. No buyers, none.... not even the MM's....out of money, credit lines maxed out...bust. This is a low probability event but more a possibility now than a week ago, a year ago, 3 years ago...imo.

To: J.T. who wrote (13373)	7/14/2002 11:59:48 PM
From: bruceleroy1_-	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 19219

If there are few or no buyers in a stock, doesn't the specialist have to buy or "accumulate" the stock to facilitate an orderly market? So in a big down market, wouldn't it only make sense that the specialist would be a net buyer if a stock is falling. Does that mean they are accumulating the shares and holding for the big meltup or wouldn't they try to hedge or sell off their long position on a bounce up unless they were confident of a huge move back up. I guess my question is how does one know with certainty that these "accumulated" shares are being held for a future meltup?