InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 65
Posts 10321
Boards Moderated 3
Alias Born 06/30/2004

Re: chartist1 post# 29897

Monday, 08/15/2005 4:40:30 PM

Monday, August 15, 2005 4:40:30 PM

Post# of 326338
Yep chartist, I show the most recent "operative" lower trendline at .3561 today but thought what the heck, if things go as they should a half cent isn't going to matter.

An even LOWER trendline is what I'm looking at when I gave that lower "shake out" target. It's probably not valid, but draw a trendline through the lows of last October 21 through November 2. That was a nice gentle uptrend that got preempted by something that made the stock bounce up. Was that Toby? When did he get involved? That was last August or earlier, right?

Wait, maybe I found it. SAIC.
================================================
"Oct. 27, 2004
NeoMedia Technologies Enters Marketing Alliance With Fortune 500 Company SAIC to Create Mobile 'WordRegistry': Registered Words to Link Cell Phones and PDA's to Targeted Online Information
NeoMedia Technologies, Inc. (OTC BB: (OTC BB: NEOM) ), said today it has agreed with Fortune® 500 company SAIC (Science Applications International Corporation) to jointly establish, launch, promote and manage the new worldwide mobile "PaperClick WordRegistry™," a linking and switching platform for use on Web-enabled cell phones and PDA's."
=================================================

The stock "took off" after that. There's always a possibility that before everything happens that needs to happen, NEOM could revisit that beginning trendline. I've seen it happen before, but not usually when there seems to be SO much potential as there seems to be with NEOM.

Anyway, that's where I got the 0.2386. That's where that lower "pre-SAIC" trendline sits today.

And yeah, my purchase today might be risky. When I tripled down at .30 on the last dip to this trendline, it felt risky too. Wish I was averaged in at your .13 lol, but I'm not.

GLTA

jonesie

Yorkville / Cornell Tracking Board #board-9964


"I can think of no more valuable commodity than information"