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 : Strictly: Drilling II -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SliderOnTheBlack who wrote (27682)	2/7/2003 11:26:31 AM
From: Claude Cormier	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 36161

Slider, You may be right. But it is too early to tell. There is a flight from the US dollar that is slowly being prepared. This may happen at any time. Could be in 2003, could be ina few years. But it will happen. Apparrently, there is a burgeoning story about the bogus report prepared by Tony Blair's gov and mentioned in Powell UN presentation. If all this is true, it could precipitate the fall of Blair's government and would cause Bush gov to lose its credibility. That would be enough to precipitate the crisis I think. fromthewilderness.com A story to follow.

To: SliderOnTheBlack who wrote (27682)	2/7/2003 3:36:25 PM
From: newfoundland1	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36161

As an earlier reader of the original Strictly Drilling site and your accurate prognosis of the path of $OSX I certainly show you respect and take what you say seriously. But surely your cyclical analysis depends on what you take the cycle widths to be. I have only gone back to 1996 and that does show an $OSX going between clear lines double topping at around the 140 mark (it looks to me on this analysis that it will continue to fall from its present perch ?). But the $HUI has followed a very dissimilar path with the $OSX equivalent being well over 200. If however you look at a pattern that only started in late 2000 then we are not so much looking at a retest of 95-100 but a Prechterian disaster. By altering the timescale you get very different results. My apologies if I am being very dumb - Wyatt