To: T-Lo Greens who wrote (3183 ) 4/6/2005 3:01:08 PM From: kodiak_bull Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 13449 Tony, Why do you think HANS is starting to derail? On a daily or weekly chart it's a nice northeasterly traveling priceline. Prepare to short this one? Only for the nimble, who may become the quick and the dead. Naturally, shorter term traders will want to protect their profits, where they draw that protective line is part of the art of trading. You may look to the last fractal high bar, which is 59.88 on 3/24. That does not seem correct to me, though. The previous fractal high bar is 58.45 on 3/15. I don't particularly care for that one, either. And ATR at over $3 is not very helpful. So, I think it's up to the trader and his time frame to figure out what kind of a down move would constitute 1) a level to protect a profit and 2) a change in trend. Since it is generally a fool's errand to short rising stocks, even on anticipated turndowns, the second question is more important. Where is HANS's 2.5 year trend likely to end, or more correctly, what signals from price and time could you take which would indicate a change in trend and, therefore, a shorting opportunity? To me, a close below the $56 line on the daily would be the first lower low that I can find on this chart in perhaps 18 months. When a rally off that lower low occurs and fails, there is the first shorting opportunity that HANS could offer to a prudent speculator. More probable in HANS' chart, is that it will find a temporary top (it might be here), pull back along the lines of earlier pullbacks (perhaps 3-4 bars, maybe $4-5) and then snap back up. And continue on its 2.5 year trend. Up. Btw, every once in a while somebody trots out an investment cliche which is simply wrong. Two occur to me, one is clearly wrong (any punter knows it) and the second is definitely wrong, although it seems, on its face, to be correct. The two are: You never have a loss until you close the position. And: You never go broke taking a profit. Of the two, the second is more insidious and takes more thought to see through to its fallacy. But fallacious it is. Kb