CALDEIRÃO DE BOLSA

thanks Ulisses.

um abraço.

Concerteza.


"Market Traveling in the Fast Lane"

By Jeff Cooper
TheStreet.com Contributor
01/07/2004 07:00 AM EST



"Like Sean Penn's character from the movie Fast Times at Ridgemont High, the bulls are celebrating by ordering pizza just as class -- or in this case the year -- begins.

So, let's let the charts do the talking today.


A daily chart of the S&P shows that the breakout over our 1050/1060 square-out coincides with the breakout over the top of a price channel that has driven the action since the important June 2002 initial momentum high.

At the same time, the surge that commenced after December options expiration also destroyed what is a typically bearish Ascending Triangle formation (see the dotted trend line in the chart below).

Just as the market was speaking by busting through the 1050/1060 resistance, and in doing so, breaking out of a channel that has contained price action for half a year, as I said yesterday, we must respect the force of the S&P to additionally break out over our 1109 to 1116 square-out area. Closing above this area for a second consecutive day appears to confirm the current strength of the market.


S&P 500 Daily





Although Tuesday's action was quiet on the blue-chips as well as the S&P, this has been characteristic behavior all the way up where one big up-bar has not seen piggybacking big up-bars. Nevertheless, the Nazz still threw off some sparks on Tuesday, as did a few listed issues that look poised to trend higher and one of which I show in my Trading Reports newsletter tonight.

Remember that in scanning for setups, it is important to look at not just the daily charts but the weekly and monthly charts as well in order to get a truer picture of the position of the stock.

Conclusion: In breaking out over a price channel that has been respected since June as well as breaking a potentially bearish Ascending Triangle formation, the S&P is doing what is not expected. When a market does what it shouldn't do, it is speaking. This is when fast moves occur. Moreover, as W.D. Gann stated: The most money is made (long or short) at the end of a move.

Now, I am not forecasting the end of a move, just stating the nature of price action.

I will refer to the fact that early last quarter I projected that a successful breakout over 1060 should project an advance on the S&P to as high as 1150/1160.

The next square, or 90 degrees up, from 1115/1116 is 1149/1150, while 180 degrees up from 1115/1116 is 1182/1183, which, for what it is worth, resonates off the date of Feb. 21. If either of these price levels is hit in that time frame and the market reverses, we will be looking to take money off the table.

The fast move continues. The blood on the tracks is that of the bear -- bubble or not. "

(in www.realmoney.com)

ulisses, podias postar o artigo
Jeff Cooper
Market Traveling in the Fast Lane.
um abraço

Duas coisas ...

1) Ele no Ano 2000 tinha uma lista de acções que nunca venderia. Eram todas tech e a uma boa parte faliu, tendo as outras se despenhado. Claro, já dentro do fim da bolha tb escreveu um artigo para "tirarem dinheiro da mesa".

2) O que ele diz até faz sentido. O problema é que as acções que sobem mais não são as que têm yield, são as techs sem dividendos. A bolha está nas tech, não nas outras.

É impossível ficar indiferente ao Cramer. Este estilo agressivo e que por vezes chega a roçar a arrogância conquista adeptos e antipatias.

Uma coisa me parece indiscutível: Ele sabe do que fala...

"Bond Rates Pop the New Bubble Thesis"
By James J. Cramer
01/07/2004 08:57 AM EST


"Bonds stink. Bonds are pathetic. Other than higher-yielding bonds, you have to be nuts to regard bonds as a good investment here.

You know why I just wrote that? I was looking back to the last "bubble" because so many of you are convinced that we are in a bubble, and I saw that I had written just the opposite. That's right, four years ago, in a series of endless pieces at the beginning of 2000, I said over and over again that bonds had gotten really interesting, the competition from bonds was heating up and you had to be a fool not to consider them. They were not only compelling, they were openly the better bet.


That, in a nutshell, is what makes 2004 so different from 2000: the competition. I can still get good, high-yielding stocks with good prospects that are much better -- and safer -- bets than bonds. I still can't find the value in getting 4.30% yield for the 10-year Treasury. I just can't. I don't want that piece of paper.

You may be more involved in stocks than many of my radio show listeners are. On radio, I confront the bond market head-on everyday as people inquire about what to do with bonds and what percentages of bonds they should have for their 401(k)s and IRAs. The answer that I have been giving is that historically, someone who only has 10 or 15 years until retirement should have at least 50% bonds. In 2000, I was recommending even a higher level.

Now?

That's a sucker's play. And when the biggest, most liquid market is a sucker's play, there's an awful lot of money around to chase stocks. "

(in www.realmoney.com)