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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Point and Figure Charting -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Don Pueblo who wrote (17392)	4/11/1999 11:27:00 AM
From: mike.com	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 34804

Apology accepted. But I have one very serious question - has Point and Figure charting been able to call ANY of the serious rises of the internet stocks. Did anyone here buy CMGI at 8 or EBAY at 8 or AMZN at 8? I think I know the answer to that question. My point being that, in this "new paradigm," some stocks defy logic, fundamental analysis and technical patterns. We're all here to learn and make money TLC and I am willing to accept new ways to do that, including coming to an understanding of P & F charting. But sometimes you have to throw caution to the wind and come to terms with a stock based on nothing but your own intuition that it is going to be THE NEXT BIG THING. I won't mention what stock I am thinking about but do some research behind it if you are interested in learning more yourself. I really think you will like what you find. Best of luck and thanks for a more civil attitude.

To: Don Pueblo who wrote (17392)	4/11/1999 12:28:00 PM
From: wizzards wine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 34804

Wonderful Post TLC...as one who found P&F and has been practicing and teaching it for over a year now.... Glad to have you Believing in P&F... We get a nice 80% cut out of the middle of most moves...not in at the bottom of out at the top...but we understand the risk and play a fair move...I'm happy as are my clients for being up 70 to over 100% last year due solely to P&F and filtering out the other noise... Thanks again... Preston

To: Don Pueblo who wrote (17392)	4/11/1999 12:54:00 PM
From: ed doell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 34804

I have no problem with statements such as when you say "qualified guesstimate". I have no problem with personal opinions (however obnoxious or misguided). I have no problem with P&F as an honored and reliable TA. I can see how you might have thought I was blasting P&F which I was not and would not... IMHO it is one of the best TA's available if the assumptions upon which it is based are in evidence when it is being applied. And if the conclusions drawn from it are not beyond its modest (and frequently reliable) parameters. I do have a problem when posters make implied predictions about support levels and price potential when the assumptions upon which they make their "supposed TA" are not in evidence. TA is a method by which opinions are supported. When the assumptions of the TA are invalid, TA is not in evidence. In the quote below you say what I wanted to say and should have said far better than I did and I thank you: "It's a tough call technically due to the spike; all the oscillators are pegged out, so we can't really see much. We must go to other signals that are not pure TA and may not fill your definition of "legitimate". If L1 merely said... this is what I think (IMO), I might disagree with him, but so what? When someone uses TA with premises which are questionable, and uses that "supposed TA" to bolster their opinion, that person IMHO gives TA a bad name. I respect your reasoned approach to my post, I respect your apology to mike.com (I think he's a big boy and can take getting roughed up from time to time), and I agree with almost all of your points which you make in your post to me. I apologize to you and the P&F thread for responding to Lost1's post with the attitude it had on it... peace, and best of luck, Ed BTW would you agree that the overall increase in volatility in the market and particularly with individual stocks makes TA difficult at best, questionable more often than not... things begin to look more like Vegas and less like the markets and stocks upon which much of TA was founded?

To: Don Pueblo who wrote (17392)	4/11/1999 3:03:00 PM
From: Lost1	Respond to of 34804

ThatLucidCat--thanks for the defensive effort. Apparently it was me, not P&F, that Ed had a problem with. Very disappointing to get that reaction from someone. I don't think I was wrong in my interpretation of the IATV chart, but that's irrelevant in Ed's case. What I wrote was somehow interpreted as a tout/prediction or promise of gold coins to Ed, who seems to have a short interest. The pullback DOES allow for a trade stop @ 16. I should have left it at that. I feel so cheap and dirty. Thanks again, Lost1 (no position in IATV)