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 : YEEHAW CANDIDATES -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Metcalf who wrote (13338)	11/17/2005 10:22:12 AM
From: Ken W	Respond to of 23958

John Thanks for your commments on our little discussion. "It's not an all-or-nothing proposition, but more of a continuum of relative certainty. If this is not right, tell me what I'm missing." Would it be fair then to say that TA is a 70% chance of being right..(a continum of relative certainty)? Case in point Regardless of events, SUNW has traded in a range of 3.50 to 4.10ish for nearly 3 years. The company has had its debt dropped to junk, earnings have not been all that good, but they have a huge cash position. TA wise I've a relative certainty that if I buy the stock at 3.55 and sell it at 4.05 I'll make money...However, if that cash position goes south the FA says that a new lower range will be found. So, when I buy at 3.55 again (3.65 right now) and there is average volume then I'd feel fairly safe in the trade..but, in a minutes notice (while I'm out planting berries or something) the stock breaks the support on high volume and the stock is oversold, then I'm under water, two days later they come out and say they have spent too much cash..The stock gaps down and I either have to take a loss or ride it out as an "investor". The longer historical TA said that 3.55 was a safe buy..The short (prior known event 3 days) TA said that the buy was a mistake...The FA says that it was a terrible mistake. Ken

To: John Metcalf who wrote (13338)	11/17/2005 12:06:44 PM
From: Galirayo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23958

John .. I've opened a can of worms here. Your theory sounds reasonable. It becomes very complex just like the Market itself. I guess you have to separate it a bit more. There is TA only, FA only, and Various shades of the Mix. Most on this thread are rooted in FA. I'm rooted in TA. The Main ingredient of TA that is missing in FA is the Supply and Demand part of the equation. In order to read all the FA that is contained in a Chart you must look at it from many different angles. But .. from my view .. FA is already in the chart with the added dimensions of Supply and Demand and Sentiment "if you read it correctly". This is where I expend my effort in order to increase my accuracy. Sometimes you just have to look at the Big Picture. bigcharts.marketwatch.com But I'm Off Track here ... Back to the Gap ... I'm sure if I must I can find a Gap here as far back as 96 or 97 or 98. Which is how this conversation was evolved. [This is only a Test .. Stay Tuned to this Station for UpDates.] I see 50.00 in my Chrystal Ball on Heavy Volume. Wait for the News. Let's see if and when it arrives. ;) Ray