|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
<x-html><HTML>
<BODY BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF">
Ahh, my good friend Jim,
<P>At the moment I am trying not to feel like Homer Simpson. I am worried
about this MU position and feel that I stepped into the short a little
early based on my trading system. After looking at the chart of MU I don't
think it is in a CANSLIM type of breakout. The volume formation is not
there and my guess is that earnings are not there.
<P>As far as the Intel deal I can't see it. After doing a little more reading
by following the links that were in the article. I read that as soon as
the 2nd tier chip makers can get ramped up they will create new supply
in the DRAM market. Also MU and Samsung are going to increase production.
i.e., increased supply. The outlook is that DRAM will be a commodity. It
doesn't make sense that Intel would spend money to guarantee lower chip
prices. When the trend for memory is to commodity status.
<P>Lastly MU has been a buyer of companies or parts there of.
<P>Like I suggested earlier, I think this rumor is a way to push the price
up because somebody's portfolio is suffering with too much MU in it. Same
thing happened with AMD and IBM.
<P>Now what matters is what people think and for now they think that the
price should go up and my poor butt has decided to face the other way.
I just hope the crowd won't trample me to debt (pun intended). I will say
that MU earning are supposed to be out on Monday some time. So I am going
to wait until earnings come out before I make any decisions.
<P>Harley
<P>Jim Greening wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> <FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE=-1>Harley,</FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE=-1>
That's a rumor that makes a lot of sense to me and you're asking for trouble
by fighting the tape. MU is in a Short Term Up Trend Channel (STUTC)
and is trying to complete a CANSLIM type cup and handle formation.
it could really jump if the rumor becomes true.</FONT> <FONT SIZE=-1>Jim</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>
</BODY>
</HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Sun Sep 27 23:11:02 1998
Received: from 204.246.137.2 (204.246.137.2)
by mail05.rapidsite.net (RS ver 0.3) with SMTP id 17864
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Mon, 28 Sep 1998 00:49:03 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from majordom@xxxxxxxxx)
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA12432
for metastock-outgoing; Mon, 28 Sep 1998 11:56:49 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: listserv.equis.com: majordom set sender to owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx using -f
Received: from freeze.metastock.com (freeze.metastock.com [204.246.137.5])
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA12428
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Mon, 28 Sep 1998 11:56:47 -0600
Received: from mail-gw3.pacbell.net (mail-gw3.pacbell.net [206.13.28.55])
by freeze.metastock.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA20528
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sun, 27 Sep 1998 22:00:28 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from p400 (ppp-207-215-161-4.grdn01.pacbell.net [207.215.161.4]) by mail-gw3.pacbell.net (8.8.8/8.7.1+antispam) with SMTP id UAA27296 for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sun, 27 Sep 1998 20:51:46 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Guy Tann" <grtann@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: can metastock do flip flops?
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 20:50:24 -0700
Message-ID: <005201bdea93$1fac0060$04a1d7cf@xxxx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
In-Reply-To: <199809271157.NAA16722@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
X-Loop-Detect: 1
Onno/Simon
Been gone for the weekend, but if you are looking for a methodology to turn
on a switch and keep it on until you turn it off, or in your case, the other
direction, we do this all the time. Called Binary Waves.
|