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.

Technology Stocks : Creative Labs (CREAF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gopher Broke who wrote (13025)	12/6/1998 4:50:00 PM
From: Nazbuster	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13925

If you think about it the price is pushed up either by surplus of buyers (at market price) or alternatively a shortage of sellers. Shortage of sellers means a price increase at a lower volume, not higher. Very good! This is something I had to learn to understand what I was seeing on the L2 display of my real-time quotes. Sometimes, when MMs are piling up on the BID side of a stock, it means there are lots of people wanting to buy and the price is about to go up. Other times, it means there are lots of people NOT willing to pay higher prices (so they accumulate on the bid), and the sellers will have to capitulate and the price will drop like a rock. I used to think it was all simplistic, but it isn't. You have to watch the total action: price, price change, volume, frequency of trades, trades at bid/ask, trades inbetween bid/ask with increasing or decreasing frequency, etc... I haven't been able to place objective definitions on what I see yet, but I'm beginning to develop a 6th sense of the action and can take appropriate positions. As an aside, some of the most violent price changes I've seen popped right out of very low activity periods. Let's hope CREAF does this (to the upside)!

To: Gopher Broke who wrote (13025)	12/9/1998 12:02:00 PM
From: Ben Beale	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13925

GB, Re: >Ben, Please can you explain why you think a price increase must be tied to an increased volume?> I dunno. I'll try. I took a masters level class at BU in 1983. We were taught that there are a number of indicators that help you interpret the market's action. The teaching point applied both to individual stocks and to the broader market and was that some indicators are obvious and easy to read; others are more obscure and harder to interpret. The text credits Bernard Baruch as being an astute trader who used the indicators successfully. After price, obviously, the instructor presented volume as the leading indicator. I look to volume to confirm price moves. Volume is relative and thus, if the stock advances on light volume, that's not as bullish as if it advances on heavy volume. The text stressed that a stock's movement on a particular day must be interpreted in the context of its average daily volume and broader market volume. I think all your comments are quite true as well and don't mean to imply volume is the only indicator or an absolute in any case. I also look at overall market breadth (advance/decline ratio, number unchanged, number of new highs/lows, total volume, etc.), general trends in specific groups, IPO action, action of "barometer" stocks, etc.) Hope this is responsive to what you asked. r/s Ben