|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Thanks to all who responded.
Before we were switched to egroups, it worked with
"Reply". My fault was to hope
that by some fancy process, RT server
would know if I hit "Reply" or "Reply to All".
I was aware of doing it the hard way which with my
OE is:
File, Properties, General to see
individual's address and type it in.
Thanks again.
Jan Philipp
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
----- Original Message -----
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From:
Clyde Lee
To: <A
href="mailto:realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxx";
title=realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxx>realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxx ; <A
href="mailto:jan4123@xxxxxxxxxx";
title=jan4123@xxxxxxxxxx>jan4123@xxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 1:16
PM
Subject: Re: [RT] Re: The Reason for
Nasdaq's Temporary Bounce
Jan,
This should come to you
twice.
I am using IE5.5 and clicked on the reply
which comes up
with realtraders as an
address.
To direct a reply to you I open your post
and copy your
address from that post and past it into
the To: box
of IE5.5
If there is an easier way I'd love to
know also.
Clyde
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Clyde
Lee
Chairman/CEO (Home of
SwingMachine)SYTECH
Corporation email: <A
href="mailto:clydelee@xxxxxxxxxxxx";>clydelee@xxxxxxxxxxxx 7910
Westglen, Suite 105
Office: (713) 783-9540Houston, TX
77063
Fax: (713) 783-1092Details
at:
www.theswingmachine.com- - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
----- Original Message -----
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From:
JHP
To: <A
href="mailto:realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxx";
title=realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxx>realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001
13:29
Subject: Re: [RT] Re: The Reason for
Nasdaq's Temporary Bounce
Neil,Thanks a lot!BTW, my question was
directed to JT , I hoped, in private for which I chose"Reply"rather
than "Reply All". As it happened before, however, it ended up
as"All".I asked RT once what is going on and how to reply
individually, but receivednoreply.Anybody knows?Jan
Philipp----- Original Message -----From: Neil Kerr
<nck1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>To:
<realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxx>Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 10:47
AMSubject: Re: [RT] Re: The Reason for Nasdaq's Temporary
Bounce> Hello Jan,>> IMHO In My
Humble Opinion> Later> Neil> ----- Original Message
-----> From: "JHP" <jan4123@xxxxxxxxxx>> To:
<realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxx>> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001
12:17 PM> Subject: Re: [RT] Re: The Reason for Nasdaq's Temporary
Bounce>>> > James,> >> > My
partner and I have tried to figure out what IMHO stands for and we>
> failed. Please explain it ASAP because our nerves are stretched
to> > the limit -:).> >> > Thanks,>
> Jan Philipp> >> > ----- Original Message
-----> > From: James Taylor
<jptaylor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> > To:
<realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxx>> > Sent: Wednesday, January 17,
2001 7:51 AM> > Subject: Re: [RT] Re: The Reason for Nasdaq's
Temporary Bounce> >> >> > > True, nobody
knows. But I think a heck of a lot of giddy,dart-throwing>
> > fools lost their shirts,> > > and retirement savings
during this recent dive. The taxi-cab drivers> that>
> > were offering stock picking advice now have decided that they do
not> like> > to> > > trade stocks
anymore. The line of lemmings to sign up for the next>
run-up> > > will be much smaller, IMHO.> > > and
the fear is in the survivors minds what can happen on
thedownside,> > and> > > that seed of fear will
turn this upswing to dust before this year> ends --> >
I> > > am watching for the next entry short.> >
>> > > JT> > >> > > ----- Original
Message -----> > > From: "Carl Vanhaesendonck"
<carl.vanhaesendonck@xxxxxxxxxx>> > > To:
<realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxx>> > > Sent: Wednesday, January
17, 2001 2:02 AM> > > Subject: [RT] Re: The Reason for Nasdaq's
Temporary Bounce> > >> > >> > > >
James,> > > >> > > > I agree - I was not to
say that a new bull market was in order. Just> > > > that
IMO the bears would be taking a nap for a while. Nobody indeed> >
> > can say whether this will be only a upside reaction in a
bearmarket,> > > > or a new bull market.> >
> >> > > > Carl> > > >> >
> >> > > > --- In realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxx, "James
Taylor" <jptaylor@xxxx>wrote:> > > > > I
wouldn't go so far as to say a bull market is forming, far from> >
> > it.> > > > >> > > > > The
lemmings that got their lunch eaten by this last decline are> >
> > wiped-out,> > > > > and it will take a hell of
a long time for the next batch to amass> > > >
enough> > > > > money> > > > > to form
another bull market.> > > > >> > > > >
We are at best, in a bear market up leg. I wouldn't get
toexcited> > > > about> > > > > it,
unless you> > > > > are a bear and are waiting to pounce
on the next inflection point.> > > > >> > >
> > JT> > > > >> > > > >>
> > > > ----- Original Message -----> > > > >
From: "Carl Vanhaesendonck" <carl.vanhaesendonck@xxxx>> >
> > > To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxx>> > > >
> Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 2:48 AM> > > > >
Subject: [RT] Re: The Reason for Nasdaq's Temporary Bounce> > >
> >> > > > >> > > > > > Just
one comment, I made the following observation re Nasdaq and> >
> > > > Volume:> > > > > > The last months
were characterized by an inverted volumebehavior> > > >
> > (increase in volume when prices decreased, and decrease
involume> > > > > > when prices rised. From the
1st trading day this year, this has> > > > > >
changed: the volume increased increased and decreased in synch> >
> > with> > > > > > price, which would suggest a
bull market is emerging.> > > > > >> > >
> > > With most indicators, like MACD, there has been not one, not
2,> > > > but a> > > > > > triple
bullish divergence, which is quite rare and also could> > >
> > > indicate the down-up trend reversal has already
started.> > > > > >> > > > > >
We will see...> > > > > >> > > > >
> Carl> > > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > > > --- In realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxx, DH
<catapult@xxxx> wrote:> > > > > > > > For
me the evidence is building that we have a significant> > >
> bottom> > > > > > at least> > > >
> > > > as good as fall 1999.> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Further evidence, David Tice was
a holiday guest host on CNBC> > > > today> > >
> > > and> > > > > > > was answering
questions from little old ladies in investment> > > >
clubs> > > > > > about> > > > >
> > how to short stocks. :-)> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > --> > > > >
> > Dennis> > > > > >> >
> > > >> > > > > > To unsubscribe from
this group, send an email to:> > > > > >
realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > >>
> > > > >> > > > > >> > >
> > >> > > >> > > >> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:> >
> > realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > >>
> > >> > > >> > > >> >
>> > >> > > To unsubscribe from this group,
send an email to:> > >
realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >> >
>> > >> > >> > >>
>> >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
to:> > realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>
>> >>>> To unsubscribe from this group,
send an email to:>
realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx>>>>>To
unsubscribe from this group, send an email
to:realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxTo
unsubscribe from this group, send an email
to:realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx
eGroups Sponsor
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx
|