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: GraceZ who wrote (15146)	12/1/2002 1:48:48 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 19219

Hi Grace LTNS. I saw you on the clown thread commenting about the "we have not yet seen the lows on the naz" mantra as that that is driving the mkt higher. Do you know on what basis the new-lows-for-the-naz theory is built? I believe it is historical chart reading from 1930s or Japan, but not sure. (new lows don't really follow if you are mapping to the 70s scenario). I have been rejecting the cw of a secular bear, since the midcap tech stocks are trading at about 1x sales (net out the cash and its much less)... and during a secular bear multiples are supposed to decline. This is midcap tech only though, maybe some of the megacaps have some room to fall... problem is they are gaining huge share. Avg P/Es don't really work on the naz with all the midcaps trading for close to their large cash positions. On the fundamental side, we have the China/underdeveloped countries buildout to look forward to for ramping tech growth rates. Bigger than the US buildout, for sure. Lizzie

To: GraceZ who wrote (15146)	12/1/2002 2:24:17 PM
From: Steve Lee	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 19219

"who are they selling to?" Good question. I think the answer lies in publicly available information. Some very large (in terms of number of employees) companies have made announcements of pension fund shortfalls and have confirmed their intentions of throwing good money after bad i.e. keeping % allocation in stocks constant with prior goals and making up the deficits from operations. Greenspan & co made comments over a year ago that they considered direct purchase of stocks to be an option to support the economy if things didn't improve. Well, we have seen since then that things haven't improved as evidenced by the further rate cuts and the more recent comments from fed figures concerning monetisation of debt. A visit to the websites for Federal Reserve, Office of the Public Debt, and observing the futures and pre market action just below major support lines are big clues that the federal govt is intervening to keep the markets up. This will all end very badly indeed.