thanks fletch...yeah I hope that breaks up eventually.

I think both swks and rfmd will do well into the seasonally strong holiday period...I'm just looking intially for their 03 highs to be hit by early 06.

hey fletch, how does rfmd look on your charts? tia

http://stockcharts.com/def/servlet/SC.web?c=RFMD,uu[e,a]daclyyay[dd][pd20,2!b200!b50!c20!f][vc60][iU....

http://stockcharts.com/def/servlet/SC.web?c=rfmd,uu[e,a]waclyyay[df][pc200!c50!d20,2!b200!b50!c20!c1...

Qualcomm Gets Boost To Compete With Motorola
Ed Lin, 08.11.05, 10:40 AM ET

Standard & Poor's Equity Research reiterated a "buy" rating on Qualcomm (nasdaq: QCOM - news - people ) after the company agreed to acquire Flarion Technologies, a private firm engaged in advanced OFDMA (orthogonal frequency division multiplex access) wireless technology.

Qualcomm will pay about $600 million stock and cash, and may also pay an additional $205 million in milestone payments "over the next few year," the company said in a statement. The acquisition is set to close later this year.

S&P Equity Research said, "We believe Flarion will boost Qualcomm's leading role in 3G solutions and strengthen its role for blended CDMA and OFDMA networks." Flarion has been in market trials with Nextel Communications (nasdaq: NXTL - news - people ), the research firm noted.

The acquisition of Flarion "will give Qualcomm added strength to compete against Motorola (nyse: MOT - news - people ) and other suppliers that plan to offer their own 3G and WiMAX designs," S&P Equity Research said.

you would think, but apparently it's like wahz just said, no vision. sons could be considered cheap at this price <g>.

I know...I still don't understand why csco, intc, msft...someone didn't go after qcom years ago.

exactly...ofdm has been considered a threat for years, so qcom goes out and buys flarion...now I could see csco wanting to buy qcom if anybody.

QUALCOMM to Acquire Flarion Technologies
Thursday August 11, 8:30 am ET
- Acquisition Strengthens Company's OFDMA Portfolio for Customers -

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050811/lath051b.html?.v=1

csco gap down towards the previous lows looks awfully similar to aug 03...my guess is the end result is the same, only this time we'll be going to 3060 on the comp in feb.

http://stockcharts.com/def/servlet/SC.web?c=CSCO,uu[e,a]daclyyay[d20030509,20030920][pd20,2!b50!f][v...

http://stockcharts.com/def/servlet/SC.web?c=CSCO,uu[e,a]daclyyay[db][pd20,2!b50!f][vc60][iUb14!Ub5!L...

Goldman Sachs Says Buy Cisco Systems On Any Pullback
10 Aug 2005, 09:21am ET

NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--Shares of Cisco Systems (CSCO) slumped 4.1% in pre-open trading after the networker's revenue growth outlook for the fiscal first quarter fell short of expectations.
Goldman Sachs recommending buying the stock on any pullback as analysis of Cisco's bookings suggest the fiscal 2006 revenue outlook may be conservative, and that the book-to-bill ratio will likely be greater than 1 for the next 4 quarters.

Analyst Brantley Thompson also said gross margins for its fiscal fourth quarter were strong and believes Cisco's stable gross margin outlook "puts a floor on expectations of steady gross margin erosion."

The stock was last down 81 cents at $18.80 on Instinet.

(END) Dow Jones Newswires

08-10-05 0921ET

well thanks <g>...I hope you're not being sarcastic. This is something a long time in the making and it's going to happen. 3200-3500 on the comp will come by aug 06. These guys with the bearish bias are going to miss the best run of the past 5 years, kind of like in 03...and all they want to do is blame it on some hidden forces...whatever.

Posted by: mjk
In reply to: ajtj99 who wrote msg# 27047
Date:6/8/2004 9:09:52 AM
Post #of 43404

That's not outrageous at all. Though I think that 2800-3000 comes later in '05. And we may spend another couple months down here messing with this 1900-2000 area...perhaps all the way through summer. Speaking of patterns, you're exactly right, we're following something that's happened many times in the past (starting from '02), pres election and all...and it's not uncommon to go nowhere all the way through summer, which would mean almost a year of consolidation, then launch in the fall and after a short correction early in '05, have a huge rest of '05. Good suggestion not to short, the risk/reward is not there at these levels. Why not buy and hold for a year, we could have near 1000 points up coming.

wrong, 2400 by oct <g>

2600+ in nov

3060 in feb

sons 75% seq rev growth...near 6 now. Wow that's something...I'm still waiting for the 2 and then 1 someone called for on aj's board <g>.

I've got to repeat again wahz, one of the smartest moves ever going on margin for it at 3...now a double.

edit: found them...

Posted by: Steve
In reply to: sylvester80 who wrote msg# 47137
Date: 4/18/2005 5:26:23 PM
Post #

sons just hit my 3 dollar target. next is 2, then 1, then you do the math

Posted by: sylvester80
In reply to: integrivest who wrote msg# 47129
Date:4/18/2005 4:55:15 PM
Post #of 56779

SONS has a gap open at $2.40 BTW from April 2003.

ok wahz, I'll try too...building a handle on this cup...going to 7.

http://stockcharts.com/def/servlet/SC.web?c=SONS,uu[e,a]daclyyay[dd][pd20,2!c200!b200!f][vc60][iUb14....

edit: that was pretty smart of you to margin it down near 3...up better than 50% since then...I remember there were quite a few folks saying you were crazy and it was going to 2...1...

I think most of the doom and gloomers were simply trained by the 00-02 drop, and programmed to believe we're in a longterm secular bear. Well the indices making new all time highs should do something to change that belief, but it hasn't seemed to. So next is the dow, it'll make a new all time high, and I'll bet the bears will simply then point out that the nasdaq is no where near a new high and that's what matters.

I agree about the downside as well...after a strong rise into mid 06, there should be plenty to short for a nice big drop. Then the real fun should start as the bears will be given hope again with that 06 drop, then they'll get slaughtered as the nas tries to reach that all time high as well over a few years...and volatility should increase greatly as diesel noted.

As far as wild bullishness, it's just more about where the money is headed next IMO...the market is as cheap now relative to other investments as it's been in a long long time.

yeah well it's kinda like this, the nas is up 100% off the 02 lows, and sometime in 06 it'll be up 200%, and even after that, if it drops for 15 minutes on a particular day, guys like syl will say the bulls are getting slaughtered...there's a ton of them and only when the nas is near 5000 again will they finally see the bulls are in fact "sitting pretty" <g>

maybe you should repost that everyday, just so anyone who comments about some of your picks not doing well will see that you initially said to buy at THE low of the 00-02 drop, and that it was a longterm plan.

Even some of the underperformers like pmcs are up 4X from there...and then there was the ntes 13X, dgin, vrsn, many others.

On another note, I wonder where syl is...notice he's not around ihub to say the bears are no longer sitting pretty <g>...this post is ridiculous and it makes no sense, so don't think I'm saying that now the bulls are sitting pretty and the bears are hurting...as I pointed out at the time, I'm sure both bulls and bears can trade the other way sometimes when they think the market may go against them...this was just a typical permabear post from him when the spx was down all of 5%...

Posted by: sylvester80
In reply to: ajtj99 who wrote msg# 46564
Date:4/14/2005 12:53:14 AM
Post #of 46592

Year 2005 so far: This has not been an easy year to trade if you were a bull. In fact bulls have been slaughtered so far this year. On the other hand it has been just as difficult for the bears for the past month as we've been bouncing between 36 and 37 of the QQQQs. However since we are currently sitting at the lows of that range, I would have to say that any bears that held their ground this past month are sitting quite pretty. On the other hand the bulls that have been predicting a market rise for more than 3 and a half months now, if they traded as such, they are sitting at huge losses with quite a bit of fear with the earnings season coming along.

And IMHO, the above in a nut shell describes the year so far. Good luck to all.

You're back to that 2900 number <g>. I've now got 3060 by feb 06...it's been a long time coming but it'll stun the hell out of the bears.

Posted by: mjk
In reply to: Joe Stocks who wrote msg# 402153
Date:6/20/2005 1:16:58 PM
Post #of 410194

"Surely no one is looking 6 months out buying at these levels."

Why not? Those buy programs are going to send this market through the roof <g>. You think it's someone supporting, and I think it's just cycles at work. 2400 in sept, 2800+ by end of 05, 3200+ by mid 06.

Posted by: mjk
In reply to: ajtj99 who wrote msg# 27047
Date:6/8/2004 9:09:52 AM
Post #of 43404

That's not outrageous at all. Though I think that 2800-3000 comes later in '05. And we may spend another couple months down here messing with this 1900-2000 area...perhaps all the way through summer. Speaking of patterns, you're exactly right, we're following something that's happened many times in the past (starting from '02), pres election and all...and it's not uncommon to go nowhere all the way through summer, which would mean almost a year of consolidation, then launch in the fall and after a short correction early in '05, have a huge rest of '05. Good suggestion not to short, the risk/reward is not there at these levels. Why not buy and hold for a year, we could have near 1000 points up coming.

Cool you can finally drink then <g>

Have a good one!

what's that LG, an anniversary, birthday?

"Surely no one is looking 6 months out buying at these levels."

Why not? Those buy programs are going to send this market through the roof <g>. You think it's someone supporting, and I think it's just cycles at work. 2400 in sept, 2800+ by end of 05, 3200+ by mid 06.

Posted by: mjk
In reply to: ajtj99 who wrote msg# 27047
Date:6/8/2004 9:09:52 AM
Post #of 43404

That's not outrageous at all. Though I think that 2800-3000 comes later in '05. And we may spend another couple months down here messing with this 1900-2000 area...perhaps all the way through summer. Speaking of patterns, you're exactly right, we're following something that's happened many times in the past (starting from '02), pres election and all...and it's not uncommon to go nowhere all the way through summer, which would mean almost a year of consolidation, then launch in the fall and after a short correction early in '05, have a huge rest of '05. Good suggestion not to short, the risk/reward is not there at these levels. Why not buy and hold for a year, we could have near 1000 points up coming.

And again, you like that "definition" because it has a much more dramatic feel...my simplified examples clearly show, as does the author of the original article I posted, that the number of affected transactions is actually only half that.

I'm not in this it to show everyone how "controlled" everything is, and I don't feel like you do that no analysis works anymore because program trading is always in control...from your posts, it's clear that you're trying to convince people over and over that there's just no use for real analysis any longer because of program trading. I'd rather just know in a realistic way how much of the daily action it actually is, and know that it really has no predictive ability at all.

ok so we have the same understanding of what the data is saying, it's just my opinion that to get a more accurate idea of how much program trading there really is, it's better to look at the percentage of total purchases and sales, or transactions.

Again, back to my example...if there are 2 billion individuals, 1 billion buying 1 share each, and 1 billion selling 1 share each, I see that as 2 billion transactions. Now if 25% of the buyers and 25% of the sellers are program trades, that to me is still 25% of the total transactions being program trades. If someone says that's 50% program trading, I think it's easy for some people to interpret that as being 50% of all transactions are program trades, which makes it sound like much more than it is.

Imagine it like this, those 2 billion individuals all have to hit the enter key on their keyboard to submit their transaction, now if 25% of both buyers and sellers are program trades, that eliminates 500 million from having to hit that enter key, but 1.5 billion still have to do it...so only 1/4 of all transactions are affected by program trading...why someone would want to call that 50% program trading I don't understand, unless it's just for a more dramatic feel to it. I would think that looking at it in terms of actual affected transactions would be much more informative.

Right, nyse volume is not doubled to account for both sides of the transaction, but that's basically how they count program trades.

If total nyse volume on a given day is 1 billion, that means 1 billion shares were traded, meaning there were 1 billion bought, and 1 billion sold. To simplify it we can think of it as 2 billion individuals buying or selling 1 share each.

If 25% of those that bought used program trading, that's 250 million.

If 25% of those that sold used program trading, there's another 250 million.

They'll call that 50% program trading, when actually only 500 million out of the total 2 billion individuals used program trading, 25%.

That's exactly what that article was about, and this from the nyse sums it up, they call this 53.3% program trading, when it's actually only 26.7% of total purchases and sales....

* examine buy programs as a percentage of total purchases (26.5 percent);

* examine sell programs as a percentage of total sales (26.8 percent);

* examine program purchases and sales as a percentage of total purchases and sales (26.7 percent);


More importantly is that there's no predictive value to it, if program trading is up or down a few percent this week, it doesn't mean anything to the market. And that data itself sounds misleading.

The description on the nyse site describes it just how he explains it...

http://www.nyse.com/Frameset.html?displayPage=/marketinfo/ProgramTrading.html

NEW YORK, June 16, 2005 -- The New York Stock Exchange today released its weekly program-trading data submitted by its member firms. The report includes trading in all markets as reported to the NYSE for June 6-10.

The data indicated that during June 6-10, program trading amounted to 53.3 percent of NYSE average daily volume of 1,361.7 million shares, or 726.0 million shares a day.

Program trading encompasses a wide range of portfolio-trading strategies involving the purchase or sale of a basket of at least 15 stocks with a total value of $1 million or more. Program trading is calculated as the sum of the shares bought, sold and sold short in program trades. The total of these shares is divided by total reported volume.

This is not the only way to measure program trading. Three alternatives for June 6-10 would be to:

* examine buy programs as a percentage of total purchases (26.5 percent);

* examine sell programs as a percentage of total sales (26.8 percent);

* examine program purchases and sales as a percentage of total purchases and sales (26.7 percent);

Is that significant?

"For the week ended June 3rd, the NYSE tells us that these orders made up a whopping 63% of all volume. Briefly, program trades are automatic buy and sell orders for 15 or more securities with a total value of $1 million or more. However, it’s important to note that program trading stats are double-counted (meaning both buy and sell orders are counted in the total), while total NYSE volume figures are single-counted. So when you see that programs made up 63% of all volume, that’s misleading – actually, programs only made up 31% of total volume. That’s still a high level compared to recent history, but historically it has not lead to anything especially notable going forward. Sometimes high program trading lead to rallies, sometimes declines, but there is not much consistent about it."

Posted by: ogm
In reply to: ogm who wrote msg# 392209
Date:5/17/2005 11:10:00 AM
Post #of 397192

I'm laying out SHORTS across the board here. End of the day should be very interesting with huge Fed drain and Snow report.
Treasury will drain another 13 billion between now and end of the week.

Posted by: ogm
In reply to: None
Date:5/23/2005 12:57:00 PM
Post #of 397192

GOOG invented the cure for cancer. I'm doubling my short here.

Posted by: ogm
In reply to: None
Date:5/10/2005 3:56:51 PM
Post #of 397192

Any earnings plays tonite ? I'm short CSCO already.

And anyone who's followed your board for any significant amount of time knows this is about the most hypocritical post ever on ihub...unbelievable.

Posted by: sylvester80
In reply to: Burk who wrote msg# 50567
Date:5/19/2005 7:31:54 PM
Post #of 51219

BURK, I thought we talked about the need to stop the taunting yesterday. Please lay off. Everyone else is entitled to their view of the market like you are WITHOUT ANY TAUNTING. Just as I expect nobody should taunt you about your calls. So lay off and please try not to take so "personal" a view of the market other than your own. There should be nothing personal from anyone here about the markets. So lay off the taunting please and show some class and apologize to Justa.

I've got a good one right from the lows...gdp came in at 3.1% on that one. This is all in the spirit of when he used to point out every time something you said didn't pan out...I noticed several times early on in the run that he continued to warn about if we break below certain levels we're going much lower, calling for drops etc, but the past few days he's been shorting q's as a protection against all his long profits <g>. I'm always amazed how someone is so heavily long all the while warning people about the downside, predicting drops, and saying how terrible everything is...and there's never actually a post about going long other than an intraday qqqq trade for 5 cents <g>.

Posted by: sylvester80
In reply to: Stowboat who wrote msg# 48204
Date:4/27/2005 10:07:26 AM
Post #of 51218

Huge deficit, rising rates, high oil prices, slowing economy, no jobs, low consumer confidence are all a mix for disaster. GDP number tomorrow will be important and I think traders are positioning themselves accordingly. Market needs 3.5% or above to get bullish. Below 3.0% is bearish. Between 3-3.5 more of the same ups and downs we've had so far with a small down bias. JMHO.

Posted by: sylvester80
In reply to: None
Date:5/19/2005 12:11:45 PM
Post #of 51218

It's possible that we could see NDX 1500/05 in very short order IMHO.

pt you meant to say down on the weekly not monthly right? Your monthly turned up in jan and should be taking affect right about now correct?

Unbelievable call looking back on it...nice work.

Now that I agree with, the market has gone no where for 15 months. You may have seen it but even some of us bulls thought 2004 wasn't going to be so great, until an end of year rally...now the 05 rally is going to take us to that 2800 target...still. This recent action has done nothing but make the next 15 months even better.

Posted by: mjk
In reply to: ajtj99 who wrote msg# 27047
Date:6/8/2004 9:09:52 AM
Post #of 46928

That's not outrageous at all. Though I think that 2800-3000 comes later in '05. And we may spend another couple months down here messing with this 1900-2000 area...perhaps all the way through summer. Speaking of patterns, you're exactly right, we're following something that's happened many times in the past (starting from '02), pres election and all...and it's not uncommon to go nowhere all the way through summer, which would mean almost a year of consolidation, then launch in the fall and after a short correction early in '05, have a huge rest of '05. Good suggestion not to short, the risk/reward is not there at these levels. Why not buy and hold for a year, we could have near 1000 points up coming.



syl's post that I referred to said that for 2005 the bulls were getting slaughtered and the bears were sitting pretty...that is quite an exaggeration when the spx was down 5% at that point. But in order to make it more dramatic being a permabear, he said in a later post that many stocks are down 50% from 2004, as if every bull owns only those. He says if people are bullish they must be buying so must be hurting, and by that reasoning the bears must be shorting and doing great, therefore at the end of last year it must have been reversed, all the bulls were sitting pretty and the bears were getting slaughtered...does this make any sense to you because it doesn't to me...don't even bulls wait to buy sometimes, and bears wait to short? Or can't bulls go short sometimes and bears go long? Well by his reasoning when he was bearish at the beginning of last nov and warning people about being long, he must have been shorting all the stocks that went up 50% the next 2 months, and must have just held the whole time, so I guess he's getting back to even about now. The point is he's a permabear who always posts stuff like this to make it sound like the bulls are always going to lose...go back to 03 and see how many posts of his say it's bearish if X happens over and over...rather than saying it's time to be bullish for a year.

Quite an amazing time we're in when a 5% correction in the s&p over a few months means the bulls are getting slaughtered and bears are sitting pretty...and this coming off a 16% rise over several months to end last year...wonder how all those bears did during that rise...I'm sure they'll all say they nailed that too <g>. Seems like this one was bearish during that rise all the way up...in fact, is he ever not bearish? The common bear cry, if the market's up it's "irrational"...brilliant analysis.

Posted by: sylvester80
In reply to: ajtj99 who wrote msg# 46564
Date:4/14/2005 12:53:14 AM
Post #of 46592

Year 2005 so far: This has not been an easy year to trade if you were a bull. In fact bulls have been slaughtered so far this year. On the other hand it has been just as difficult for the bears for the past month as we've been bouncing between 36 and 37 of the QQQQs. However since we are currently sitting at the lows of that range, I would have to say that any bears that held their ground this past month are sitting quite pretty. On the other hand the bulls that have been predicting a market rise for more than 3 and a half months now, if they traded as such, they are sitting at huge losses with quite a bit of fear with the earnings season coming along.

And IMHO, the above in a nut shell describes the year so far. Good luck to all.


Posted by: sylvester80
In reply to: wahz who wrote msg# 20655
Date:11/9/2004 11:16:57 AM
Post #of 25216

I would be very careful long with this market at this stage IMHO.

Posted by: sylvester80
In reply to: None
Date:11/17/2004 12:42:45 PM
Post #of 46592

BTW, I'm seeing lots of junk fly. Usually that happens when "strong shorts" capitulate (I call them "strong shorts" cause they shorted junk rather some high flyers). In any case, that could mean we are closer to making a top... but you know... irrational markets give irrational results...

The only method there seems to be to take a position then pray it goes your way, if it doesn't, blame the "Big Boyz", "Mr. Market"... whatever it takes to say it's not your own fault.

from the s&p site as of 4/5/05...

2004 earnings were 67.67, up 23.7%, P/E 17.93

2005 earnings est 75.05, up 10.9%, P/E 15.74

Yep, and now apparently they'll have to pay to do it <g>.

Yep, and the market did go on to new highs...so as far as him wondering how many years it would take to do that, it was about 4 months <g>.

Wow it must be something to be so great and feel ok ripping into people on a regular basis, and this from someone who was caught red handed lying himself...he said he was going to work on this behavior, I guess he decided not to.

http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=4623997

Posted by: mjk
In reply to: Steve who wrote msg# 20940
Date:11/21/2004 12:39:03 PM
Post #of 25158

Ok, I see you've admitted you've been wrong and that's fine...but is there an honest explanation for this series of posts I mentioned earlier? Did the market really do exactly what you said it would for two weeks prior to 11/2, because what I saw was you saying we could go to XXXX, but you weren't sure, you had poor visibility, etc.

Posted by: Steve
In reply to: Ek who wrote msg# 20645
Date:11/2/2004 3:41:07 PM
Post #of 20724

the market has done just about exactly what i have said it would for the last two weeks so i dont feel the same way

if it feels like gambling, then step back until the dust settles. that feeling affects sleep

Posted by: Steve
In reply to: husk who wrote msg# 20217
Date:10/25/2004 1:13:16 PM
Post #of 20725

sub 1400 easy, but since im long as of fridays close, there is a reason i havent thought about it much...i dont want to (gg)

on the upside i have to believe the ndx tests 1450 but it may not get past it

i am taking things extremely short term as i have such poor visibility now and for the last two weeks

Posted by: Steve
In reply to: qqq bee who wrote msg# 19956
Date:10/21/2004 2:17:43 PM
Post #of 20725

not really for me yet. really not liking the now massive divergence between techs and non techs. there are lots of possible resolutions, but i havent a clue which one happens

as i see it the main ones are:

1. all indexes rally from here

2. non techs rally and techs pause/consolidate

3. all indexes sell off

Noticed your "mar 23rd back on" footer there...only now instead of a real rocket, you think it'll be more of a bottle rocket right <g>.

"The Committee perceives that, with appropriate monetary policy action, the upside and downside risks to the attainment of both sustainable growth and price stability should be kept roughly equal. With underlying inflation expected to be contained, the Committee believes that policy accommodation can be removed at a pace that is likely to be measured."

Doesn't sound too threatening...maybe next time you'll get the removal of "measured" you're looking for.