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.

Politics : High Tolerance Plasticity -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: que seria who wrote (17913)	12/1/2002 12:44:09 PM
From: pvz	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 23153

Que, I'm glad you mentioned volume, because I thought volume was supposed to decline as a H&S progressed, and I distinctly see volume increasing. Yet you are the first person that I have seen mentioning this. Your horizontal resistance at 965 is perfectly visible; however I see it as a broad resistance zone between 923 and 965. After eight up weeks in a row I would expect the next move to be, at a minimum, some turbulence within this zone. If the market spends some time going nowhere fast, it will be possible to test that falling 9-00 resistance line at a somewhat lower level than where the resistance is right now. If this isn't a H&S top, but a domed one instead as you believe, the ultimate outcome is also unlikely to be bullish as you point out, since the trend is still down. What I struggle to get my brain to grasp, is how one can make a plausible "the bottom is in" argument based on a handful of recent positive developments, while the technical picture is showing all indices still firmly ensconced within their downchannels, beginning to push up against some major resistance (I don't consider 20 or so S&P points to be sufficiently material to matter in the bigger picture) and on visibly declining volume. It seems more like a leap of faith to me at this point, but I would love to stand corrected. Actually, if the employment numbers are an important factor in the recovery hypothesis, I would be inclined to ignore them because employment tends to lag, not lead in economic recoveries. Therefore, I would consider this data to be a red herring at this point. You certainly aren't arguing for an imminent recovery, but perhaps somebody else could enlighten me. PVZ