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 : Classic TA Workplace -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: UnBelievable who wrote (57147)	10/20/2002 8:36:19 PM
From: bcrafty	Respond to of 209892

Was the rally from 10/10 spontaneous? As spontaneous as program trading can be on that day I still believe in my +50 VIX program buying theory based on the intraday timing of the rally that day, and the intraday timing of the 7/24 rally as well. People can espouse various "conspiracy theories" such as small traders vs. the fed, small traders vs. the options makers, small traders vs. the institutions, etc. Well, maybe part of all that is small traders vs. program trading. It would seem to fit well with any of the prior ones listed, for those that wish to make the connection. Who knows, maybe we'll get a 1987 crash type scenario, with an intraday VIX over 100 and it will shoot this idea down.

To: UnBelievable who wrote (57147)	10/20/2002 10:35:56 PM
From: GraceZ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 209892

A real rally is one based on people buying stock based on an expectation that they will be able to sell it for more in the future. And you are saying that those that bought on that day expected to sell lower? What we are seeing is people buying stock not because they expect to profit on the resale of that stock but to induce others to invest in the market either to enable them to distribute inventory at higher prices or because they are compensated based on assets under management not based on performance. One always buys with the idea that prices are going higher whether you are covering a short position or buying to hold. You want to assign a nefarious motive, but profit is a totally honorable motive in a capitalistic society. I never buy expecting price to be higher within my chosen time frame and I always sell expecting the price to be lower and I certainly don't expect anyone else to act differently. Is it somehow immoral to sell stock that you know is over-priced or the company's financials are questionable to naive investors who you nothing about, who you don't know the first thing about their investment objectives, who make the mistake of thinking it will be worth more in the future based on past price performance? If so that makes what a short seller does immoral because it pretty accurately describes what they do. The down action has basically induced the public to sell and sell they have for over a year, allowing these same market participants you think run the market to accumulate a hellova lot of stock....some against their will (someone has to buy the stock the public throws out). When you sell you always have to ask yourself who is buying? The public has not been buying, the idea that they are being distributed to is patently false as shown in my money flow data. The stock the dealers have accumulated will be distributed higher, it always is. The public repeatedly sells into accumulations and buys distributions. What gave this particular rally persistence was the selling, not the buying. If one knows these things, what is it that keeps you from benefiting from that knowledge yourself? If you feel that the market is inherently crooked and weighted against you, why participate at all? If the Fed is able to move the market at will how come they have chosen to move it down for two years? What is the motive? The downside has only had the effect of making the dealers net longer and longer even with all the bear rallies.