To: Doug R who wrote (9505 ) 12/22/1997 10:43:00 AM From: Esteban Respond to of 79378
Doug, I don't think BMC's signal failure on 12/17 is cause enough to extend the waiting period for PGDCEB signal monitoring. My concern is morning downward gaps as far as risk control goes, and though BMC went on to new lows, the stop loss trigger at one tick below the signal low would have worked fine. AGP OTH made new lows on further bad news and I agree that it's appropriate to start the waiting period anew for this one. It's a shame PLH bounced before the waiting period even got started. I wasn't even monitoring it yet. TRKN I'm monitoring post signal from 12/15, doing fine. TSEMF's intraday trendline was broken on Thursday. If one was using a more conservative daily trendline, Friday's decline broke it and closed the position, unless one is using de celerating trendlines as opposed to accelerating trendlines which worked so well on SGI. Too bad, it's off to the races today. This portion of the system is the most variable and the most subject to interpretation IMO. Thanks for the info on SNB, Doug. I've deleted it from my list. I've got quite a list of about 30 going now. The majority are percolating in the waiting period. In a few weeks I would expect to begin getting signals fairly often. I've noticed that many of the PGDCEBs give more than one signal, even if trading the first signal was profitable. This has me looking at reversing and shorting the cats when the bounce plays out. Any ideas on a trigger for this that would indicate weakness beyond trendline breaking? The beauty is that if there is a new signal low, you can catch a longer downleg than the upleg you just rode. In addition the signal day itself is a wonderful signal to cover, allowing you to buy back at almost the lowest possible price. Esteban