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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Strictly: Drilling and oil-field services -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ViperChick Secret Agent 006.9 who wrote (17198)	3/30/1998 1:27:00 PM
From: Broken_Clock	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 95453

lisa, Don't know about oil but gold tested sub 280 twice then failed to reach there on the third attempt. I doubt that all the funds would have jumped on the wagon at these prices if they thought we were going back down.

To: ViperChick Secret Agent 006.9 who wrote (17198)	3/30/1998 2:04:00 PM
From: papi riqui	Respond to of 95453

Subject: R. Insana history lesson on oil price gaps Lisa, I, too, got just a whiff of Insana's report. He referenced some market watcher's report that in the 3 prior instances when the price of oil gapped up like it did on Monday last (supposedly due to short squeeze), it soon retested its prior low. Insana added something to the effect that this phenomenon occurred at a time when the bullish percent of (analysts or fund managers, I guess) was at a low, pointing out that in the case of last Monday's runup this "bullish percent" was 4% (i.e., only 4% of analysts were bullish on oil). This is the gist of what he said to the best of my recollection. The point of it all is simply that those who hope for a better buying opportunity may get one sooner rather than later if Insana's history tale holds true to form. regards, p r