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 : PYNG Technologies -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ward Nicholson who wrote (2129)	4/26/1998 9:07:00 PM
From: the Chief	Respond to of 8117

Hi Ward, I don't think it has got out of hand! Your process of analysis is TA. I don't use TA for this type of stock, however, I do submit to your prowess in TA analysis. These are facts? Heh Heh. Apparantly, you obtained your science degree from a much different place than I. These read a lot more like opinions than facts. My degree received from the market. Did I read yours right, Pyschology ? ...It can be debated at length but the facts remain... 1) The stock has shown no weakness to substantiate a prolific fall to the $3.00 level. This corresponds with the basic theory that what goes up must come down. You substantiate your argument with "the fact" of a 25% drop. No one person on this thread has ever said that Pyng was undervalued or even "fairly valued" at $6.70. Keeping things in perspective is important here. First the $6.70 that was reached was based on sheer hysterical impulse buying. Since that period a "more logical" level determined by the market, of $5.00 was reached. You said:. Just over one month later (April 20) we see PYT closing as low as $4.25. Not even taking the full trading ranges into account, PYT has been down over 25% from its closing high (down over 40% if you use intraday highs and lows). I am at a loss to understand how you cannot view this as weakness. Honestly Ward I can't understand the application of $6.70 as your "start point". All penny stocks and remember before this occured it was, explode out of the gates. They tend to get pumped and finally settle to a level resembling a base (stage 1)after what appears as a 4th stage breakdown. So the reason I donot look at this as weakness is because the stock is down to $4.55 from the "normal level of $5.00 Next point 2) Sufficient buying seems to appear at the $3.85 level to support the "fewer and fewer shares" available at this level Heh Heh. Good one Chief. I will grant you that buying materializes when $3.85 - $4. (I don't know why you you think $3.85 is the "true" support level anyway...support is better defined as a zone, not one particular price.) I wonder if you have taken the time to notice that since March 23, when PYT established this level of support, the ensuing rallies have been less and less powerful. I have noticed the rallies have been less and less powerful. I also have noticed that the market reacts very quickly to any news generated by Pyng. Surprisingly enough even if its duplicate information. The less powerful rallies are concerning but with event driven stocks like Pyng, one mediocre NR will send it into another set of rallies doing the same thing. You said:Might I suggest that we are witnessing the formation of a descending triangle? I agree but believe a new series of events will stem the descent. Next point 3) No "track record" has been established as to what will happen if it were to break the $3.85 level.If you are going to use concepts support and resistance in your arguments, then behold the relative lack of volume that occurred when PYT rose from $3 to $4 at the beginning of March. Many more shares exchanged hands in February at the $2.90 level, and at $4 level in March, than did at price levels in between. For heaven's sake, PYT moved from $3 to $4 in two days! Quite honestly, you have had a "track record" right in front of you all along. Perhaps you invalidate it because the momentum of PYT was in a different direction than the hypothetical case posed to you at this point in time. If so, you are mistaken. Under normal circumstances infilling would occur betweeen $4.00 down to $3.00 . However my belief is that there will be significant support at the $3.85 level if we test it again. If it were to blow through that level I would then tend to agree that infilling would occur. But why stop there ? why not discuss the then inevitable fall to .85c? Next point 4) Market depth at anyone point does not seem to indicate the direction of the stock because of "impulse buyers", for this stock. This is a fact? Huh? A buyer is a buyer, a seller is a seller. The reasons for which they buy and sell have no bearing on the direction of the trading. What is your point here? That there are certain buyers in the weeds waiting to drive PYT up? This is a fact? No this is history. Something that is extremely difficult to extract from TA. I daytraded that data (market depth) for the period that you were on the thread predicting "no support". We had this discussion before. You had stated that there was no support at a specific level, I stated that market depth confirmed that but that the stock was not reacting to anything else but impulse buyers. The stock recovered very quickly. Next point 5) TA is useless on "event driven" stocks, with a single product, such as this. Now really Chief...you call this a fact? Heh Heh. You are opining and you don't even know it. Actually I do know I am stating opinion, that why I say things like "I think" or "I believe" !! In my years in the market I have found this to be fact. Two examples in the extreme, Ballard Power(earlier years, may be before your time) and EPA. Single product companies with nothing else to offer are extremely volatile and react to events far more radically than all other stocks. This is fact! Next point ...The position of a $4.00 to $4.90 envelope has been demonstrated, whereas your $3.00 scenario has not. As a result of this stock not testing your prediction, or even giving any clear signs of that prediction, there is little to debate. All you keep saying here is that "because it hasn't happened yet, it is not at all worthwhile to even discuss the possibility of it happening". I ask again Chief, what is speculating? Ans: Speculating is the "art of decision". It stems back to the glass being half full or half empty. I prefer to look at the glass as only having half the possible contents and do not need to "speculate where the other half went or whether the other half ever existed. However to speculate whether it will rain and fill the glass or that the existing water level will evaporate is irrelevant to the "present level of the glass". It is relevant to the future quantity in the glass. You have determined that there will be a dry hot weather and the water will slowly evaporate. At the same time telling people there is absolutely no chance of rain!! I don't believe weatherpersons!! Next point Heh Heh. Heh Heh. My analysis has never been based on logic and never will be. The market is not about what is logical. I pity the trader who thinks it is. It is about what is probable. In any case, perhaps you would do well to learn the differences between facts and opinions before playing science I have been trading for many years. I retired at the age of 46, I guess I just must be a good guesser. I really enjoyed this statement. Heh-Heh(my turn) "My analysis has never been based on logic and never will be." No argument Ward (I know, a low shot, sorry, but really, you left yourself wide open) Thanks for the info, its very interesting the Chief