Adaptive Medias Inc (fka ADTM)

[Imperial Whazoo]

I do not agree with the analysis that was put out earlier today that says we have support at .51 and that we need to pay attention to the .51 level because we can draw a line back to May 10, when we last visited .51.

You can, in fact, draw a thin green line that connects to the high of that day, and thus allegedly illustrates that support is at .51, but I contend it does not matter, and here's why:

Here is the volume that happened back in May, when we last visited the .51 area:

May 3 - 27,515 shares
May 8 - 100 shares
May 10 - 52,105 shares

And here are the volumes for the last two days:

September 24 - 5,281,909 volume
September 25 - 5,453,891 volume

Because I felt that there was something wrong about the analysis to which we were subjected via the YouTube lecture today, I just spent 30 minutes calling up every minute in a 1 minute chart view going all the way back to May 10 so that I could be certain that I am right about support levels in the past for MIMV.

Actually, if you look below, there is a volume event from July 2012 that I think defines support, but in general, what is important is what the patterns are in the last two days, because there just never was volume that provided data points other than the last two days and in July.

By looking at it in 1 minute candles, I found out that there were only 30,555 shares at .50 and 2,200 at .51 back then.

Thats not support! Thats absurd, IMHO. How many of us traded more than that in the last two days? So there just is no volume at .51 to use to define support. Its just not there.

So, what I'm contending is that we do not need to worry about pull backs to .51 because there is nobody parked there with much of a position in the company. On the other hand, becaus .53 is the 618 Fib retrace level of the A-B leg (see discussion below), I do think .53 is about right.

And I think an examination of the 10 minute chart will show that the professionals trading this at the MMs used the Fibs to navigate by, since there is not enough volume in the past (as I've said above).

What I think is that we should look at the last two days to define the context of what support and resitance are.

Now a word about the charting techniques employed in the YouTube lecture today: I do not think they were used incorrectly, per se. The only problem is that the past low voilumes do not provide enough data points to actually employ those techniques, except in one case, which was back in July 2012.

We saw a foretaste of the last two days in a three day, moderately high volume event back in July.

There were three days in July 2012 (7/11, 7/12, 7/13) with volume enough to conclude that the high of 7/13 (.305) is support, IMHO.

So here is my read of the last two days.

Inside these two days, I see an A-B, a B-C, and a C-D formation, and then I see a consolidation at where we are right now.

A-B is .182 to .54
B-C is .54 to .4135
C-D is .4135 to .717

Consolidation sets up at about .53 and we have crept up the upper bollinger line since it held at .53 earlier today.

And I draw a Fib retrace using the A-B line as its base, which looks to me to put a standard 618 retrace at the .53 level, which I've already noted is where we held today.

So we can, in fact, watch ,53 (or thereabouts) for intraday support, but not because of what happened back in May, 2012.

My basic point is that, IMHO, we need pay all of our attention to what the patterns and the Fibs are in the last two days because the virtually non-existent volumes of the past render using past data points useless.

Thats how I see it, so basically, lets not panic tomorrow.

I completely disagree with the analysis of the YouTube lecture and I do not see the parabolic candle yesterday as a problem because we closed above yesterday's close today and we did so on higher volume.

We did not pull back into the parabolic candle body. We closed above the body. And additionally, we dealt handily with the opening gap today. The gap problem is behind us.

I do not think this is going to do any kind of breakdown into the body of the candle.

Thats how I see it.

Thats my opinion.

Imperial Whazoo