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 : Classic TA Workplace -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Freep who wrote (136248)	9/6/2006 10:51:38 PM
From: Henry J Costanzo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 209892

Wow, Freep...you certainly read a lot into that simple statement of mine re the oils. Simple fact ...interesting and useful to know....is that the relative weakness of the oils contributed to a larger decline in the indexes today than otherwise would have been the case.. You were right to hit me, though, on that little FAish twist I added..which implied that the fall in oils would be good for the market. That was, of course, a flagrant violation of Shack's Law..and a stupid one, at that... But I was NOT implying, as you suggest, that a move in a broad index may be "good" or "bad" depending on its "cause". However, I do believe it very useful ..and important...to be as aware as possible of moves in sectors...oils and financials, for example.....which may be affecting the broader indexes one way or another...In the same way, btw, as I have always found it very helpful..(notwithstanding your sneers <LOL>) to parse the DOW when the bulk of its move reflects that in only a small number of its components.....