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: sylvester80 who wrote (96593)	7/20/2002 11:39:09 PM
From: SOROS	Respond to of 99280

I have no problem with anything you just said. I just think the moral issues contributed much more to this mess, and under Clinton, it accelerated. So, I suppose, in the final analysis, it is a mute point. The US was headed here anyway. Clinton just helped "cut to the chase." I remain, SOROS

To: sylvester80 who wrote (96593)	7/20/2002 11:39:19 PM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 99280

Sylvestor how do you know just where to drow those lines? I drew a channel at 1560, 1415 (apr 17 maybe), 1290, 1050 (July 18 maybe?) Thus I have a small excursion outside the channel that you do not. But over that distance it sure changes the bounce points a bit due to slope differences. How does one decide? It would seem to me that I have more exact points hits at the channel top than you do. Am I nitpicking, is there a definate standard or are we both more or less guessing a channel here. Close to 10 or more exact hits +- a couple points. The bottom of my channel is smack between the two huge black candles near Mar 4. (which seems to be the top of the old channel. Kinda like we did a jump from one channel to the next higher level but then immediately reversed back down. Is this nitpicking and or does it matter? M