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.

Politics : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Robert O who wrote (25210)	10/12/1998 2:59:00 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

re: This Freudian metaphysical dialectic What you are doing is pattern recognition. This is a very useful activity; it allows you to come up with possible associations and patterns that you hadn't seen before. However, once you've noticed a potential pattern, then you have to apply some logic to it. Is there any underlying reason for the bottom in 1998 to be the same absolute number as in 1996? I can't think of any. Is there any underlying reason to expect that (split-adjusted), the 1998 bottom will be twice the 1996 bottom? Again, I can't think of any. Actually, I can think of plenty of reasons why the two bottoms should be the same, using split-adjusted numbers. That would put the 1998 (or 1999) bottom at 11. While we're at it, can you think of any reason for this nvls-induced rally to last more than a few hours? This reminds me a lot of what happened with amat's last report. I used that as an opportunity to buy amat puts, and made good money. I expect to make more, on all the nvls puts I bought today. Today's buying is a brain-dead knee-jerk reflex by momentum guessers, who are buying the news-of-the-moment, and ignoring the longer-term pattern.