COMMENT on "PIG": There is no change from the last issue, other than to the cash balance.
The Contrarian's View is published 11 times per year on a mostly-irregular schedule, and the views expressed are those of the author and editor, Nick Chase. Because nobody can predict the future, results of past suggestions or recommendations are no guarantee of future results. Material in this publication may be freely quoted provided proper attribution is given to its source. Subscription rate: Free on the Internet through the World-Wide Web service at Assumption College. Using your favorite Web-browsing program, Open URL http://www.assumption.edu. Mailed paper subscriptions, one year for $39 to The Contrarian's View, 132 Moreland Street, Worcester, Massachusetts 01609. There is a limit of 50 paid subscribers at one time; please check for availability before sending any money. Sorry, Visa and Mastercard are not available. Overseas subscription rate, U.S. $54. Unsolicited material sent to us by UPS or by courier other than the postal service is refused and returned to sender! Phone: (508) 757-2881
The arbitrage was possible because the cost of mailing a letter from, say, Spain to the U.S. was about one-third that of mailing it from the U.S. to Spain. So Ponzi's promotional idea was to buy up coupons overseas, redeem them for postage in the U.S., then sell the postage (at a slight discount) in the U.S. market. After expenses, one's money would be doubled in but a few weeks' time.
This might actually have worked if Ponzi had just kept the idea to himself and executed the arbitrage quietly and on a modest scale, year after year. But a true con artist can never keep a secret.... not when facing the enormous profit potential of bringing others along for the ride. As the money flooded in, Ponzi paid the earliest "investors" from the cash thrown at him by those that followed; these early success stories just fueled the frenzy, until finally the influx of cash from the latecomers was not great enough to pay of the early birds (and continue to feed Ponzi's now-extravagant lifestyle). Then the whole scheme collapsed, with everybody who was left in the pool holding an empty bag. Yes, a few thousand dollars worth of coupons had actually been processed, but this was peanuts when compared with the millions of dollars which had passed through Ponzi's hands. He went to jail.
If people had just stopped to think, they would have realized that this scheme, even if legitimately attempted, could not possibly have succeeded on the scale Ponzi was proposing. If Ponzi were making 100% on his money in a few weeks, then somebody else had to be on the losing side of the arbitrage, in this case Uncle Sam. Once the U.S. Post Office had noticed it was losing tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of dollars a month, it would have shut down the scheme by limiting redemption of the coupons to a dollar amount, or perhaps to one or two at a time. Since Ponzi's rate of return (in theory) depended on rapid turnover, this would have quickly put him out of business.
Now, Ponzi schemes still crop up from time to time, but the stock market is generally not considered to be one of them. Indeed, there are differences: The stock market is an essential element in the functioning of the capitalist system, where Ponzi's profiteering was not. The stock market also has thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of shills.... er, sorry, "advocates".... touting its merits, where a Ponzi scheme needs only one or a few. The stock market also provides ownership of corporate America and a cash return derived from its earnings, while a Ponzi scheme (if it were legitimate) is usually based on some form of arbitrage which requires a loser on the other end.
But there are also similarities, the most important of which is: The (capital gains) returns of the early birds are paid for with the cash of the latecomers. When, following a gigantic bubble such as we're now experiencing, the inevitable collapse in prices arrives, the latecomers will be left holding a bag of much-devalued stocks.
After the coming market meltdown, with stock prices off by 30% or so in a few weeks' time, people will wonder, as they did in the 1987 Crash, where did the money vanish to? Guess what: There is no money in the stock market (or stocks, for that matter) other than that required for settlement. The stock market is an auction market of buyers and sellers; only a very small part of the outstanding shares are traded on any day. When people refer to today's "$7.2 trillion stock market", they mean the $7.2 trillion current paper value of stocks in the hands of institutions and the public. This is what all those shares would be worth if they all traded hands at current prices.... an impossibility, of course.
What actually happens, Mr. or Mrs. or Ms. Latecomer, when you throw your hard-earned money into your favorite mutual fund, is that somebody else is using the auction market to convert holdings to cash and/or extract a fee for doing so. Doesn't it give you a warm, fuzzy feeling to know that your "savings" are going toward the country club dues of some grossly-overpaid CEO, or to pay for the lunch of a fat-and-happy money manager, or for the down payment on the opulent estate of a newly-minted Silicon Valley millionaire? Once you have placed your bet in the stock market, your cash belongs to somebody else.... somebody who was earlier than you, and checked out in time. As in a Ponzi scheme, "investors" today have become transfixed on the return on their money, when they really should be worrying about the return of their money.
The press fawned all over Charles Ponzi until his bubble burst, just as the press fawns over the stock market today with the idea that it's easy for everybody to become rich. After the meltdown, the press will be saying, "Of course stocks were overpriced and prices had to come down; it was obvious". You will be left wondering, if it was so obvious, why didn't they tell you this before the bubble burst?
Caveat emptor.
There is some truth to this. Upward pressure by the Feds on long-term interest rates does come primarily from its borrowing in the credit markets. Problem is, the government doesn't owe the remainder of the national debt "to itself"; it owes that debt to us, mostly as future Social Security, Medicare, Civil Service and military retirement benefits. In the next century, as those benefits are paid out, the nonexistent "trust funds" this debt represents must be converted to cash. There are three ways to do this.... borrow in the credit markets, take the money from general revenues (that is, taxes), or print it. (Or, the government could wipe out the debt by defaulting on its promise to pay benefits.)
Perhaps all three approaches will be tried; but that most likely to occur first is borrowing. The "trust funds" debt is not like the externally-owed debt, which can be rolled over indefinitely (as long as there are willing buyers). It is debt that must be redeemed, on an entirely predictable schedule based on the aging of the population, beginning about the year 2005 and really picking up steam after 2010. (The Medicare "trust fund" is already draining away, and at the current rate will be exhausted in 2001.) Thus, we could be faced with the spectacle in a future year of a slight budget surplus (but don't hold your breath waiting) and a declining national debt, but net government borrowing in the credit markets of $300 to $500 billion per year, with intense upward pressure on interest rates, as the redemption of the "trust funds" is financed by yet more borrowing.
Surveys show that the great majority of "baby-boomers" are very cynical about receiving any Social Security or government medical benefits at all when
they retire, while the economists are saying, "No problemo." Seems to me the public has it about right on this issue, while the economists have their collective heads in the sand. Why the boomers haven't yet risen up against this great injustice (pay now; get nothing later) is beyond me. What are they waiting for?
According to surveys, a significant minority of people who say they will be casting their votes for Bill Clinton do not expect him to finish out a second term, but say that he will be impeached or hounded out of office as more details of the various scandals swirling about him and Hillary become known. This is an assessment I agree with.
The Internet chatter is that indictments were handed down against Hillary and others by grand juries on Friday, October 18, and will be announced shortly after the election. Whereupon (if true), Bill could instantly pardon his wife.... but perhaps not survive the firestorm of protest that would follow.
The presidential election is actually not over until December 16, when the electors cast their ballots. Should an indictment/pardon occur in the interim, Bill's electors might find themselves under intense pressure not to vote him into office again. If there is no clear majority in the electoral college, the election is thrown into the House, where it is likely Bob Dole would be elected. At any rate, the electors' votes will not be announced until January 7, 1997, while we would suffer an intense constitutional crisis in the interim.
Should indictments against Hillary be handed down (or announced) after Bill is safely returned to office, then we will have a situation more reminiscent of Watergate in 1973 and 1974. Drip.... drip.... drip.... until a "deep throat" and/or "smoking gun" emerges for the final coup de grâce. Those of you old enough to remember Watergate will recall that Richard Nixon became totally obsessed with it, to the point where Alexander Haig was running the presidency day-to-day; and it destroyed his health.... Nixon nearly died from phlebitis shortly after he resigned.
As Watergate inched toward Nixon's bill of impeachment and resignation, there were serious concerns that we would not survive the crisis with our Constitution and freedoms intact.... that there would be some sort of putsch or military takeover. Well, we survived it the last time, so maybe it will be easier this time around, with less to fear. But a democracy is a fragile thing; it requires constant vigilance from its citizens. If you don't care about your own freedoms, certainly no powerful civilian or military leader will care about them for you.
When I was younger, I wondered how the German people of the 1930s, who appeared to basically decent at the core, could have allowed the formation of the Nazi government, whose destructive ways led us to the Holocaust and a world war. Then I thought, what would I do if thugs somehow gained control of our government? I would probably try to keep a low profile and stay clear of politics, keep earning a living and survive as best I could, while trying to convince myself that things probably weren't really all that bad after all, and were sure to get better soon. This undoubtedly is what most good Germans did, even while a significant number got sucked up into the herdthink of the Goebbels propaganda machine.
Today, when I have seen a young seminary student incarcerated because he dared to ask Bill Clinton an embarassing question ("What happened to the middle-class tax cut?") at an open meeting; and seen a businesswoman detained and charged because she told Bill "You suck" to his face, I think we have edged closer to the perils of Nazi Germany than most of us would like to admit. I am not saying that the United States is not still one of the most free countries on Earth, only that I don't like the trend.
To believe the Clintons, one must also believe that an astounding array of investigators, FBI agents, innocent witnesses to not so innocent events, federal regulators, state troopers, former business associates, law firm employees, harassed women, and investigative reporters are all chronic liars. In fact at the heart of the president's defense is the biggest conspiracy theory of them all: that somehow (and for unspecified reasons) there has been an enormous, unprecedented, and organized effort to portray the Clintons unfavorably, and that their associations with crooks, drug dealers, financial scam artists, contra arms suppliers, dirty tricksters, and others of minimal repute are at worst coincidental or at best false or a GOP plant. - Sam Smith (October 1996)
Vote for Bill. He's not indicted (yet). - bumper sticker
Smoke Dope, Dodge the Draft, Cheat on Your Wife, Become President, The American Dream - homemade campaign sign
This is not unlike the expansion of the stock market between the spring and now. The extra push of money (air) since June has expanded the second link, that is, to new highs in the blue-chip stocks, while the first link (the broad market) has actually deflated slightly. Earlier this year I said that the highs seen in the over-the-counter market in May would not be seen again for many years, and I still say this is true as measured by unweighted indexes such as Russell or Wilshire. When looking at the NASDAQ average, weighted by large cap stocks, I see a double top.
Now, finally, there are signs the "coasting period" I also expected earlier this year is drawing to a close. Unlike July, where mutual-fund inflows virtually disappeared after the market tanked 8%, today mutual-fund inflows are dropping off while blue-chip stocks poke around near their highs. New cash is coming in at the rate of $2.5 to $3 billion per week, down from $5 to $6 billion per week last spring.
I expect the dropoff in new cash to continue, more sharply after we're past the holiday season, so the most likely time for the bear market to resume (or begin, in the case of blue-chip stocks) is in January, with the meltdown arriving in the spring.
I have urged everybody, even you young folks just getting started, to get out of all stocks and mutual funds except gold and money-market funds, regardless of what my, or anybody else's indicators say. Time is quickly running out.... don't delay.
Some people think the time to sell is when everyone else is selling. That the time to get out of stocks is when stocks are being dumped, the market is falling, and execution prices are terrible. That the finest strategy for self- preservation is to make a mad rush for the door once the theater has caught fire. After all, they are then doing the "right thing". They are "financially correct", and their actions are reinforced by current articles in the Wall Street Journal, Money Magazine, and commentators on CNBC.
Such people are called Lemmings.
It has been three weeks since I posted "Sell Stocks Now" on the Internet, on September 15. These have been three weeks of steady or modestly rising prices for most of the major stock averages. For those individuals with millions of dollars in invested in stocks, or institutions with billions, the intervening time has provided a perfect environment for liquidation of stock assets, and conversion to other forms of wealth.
Well, the grace period is over, and the time for lemmings is at hand. Of course the lemmings have also been around these past few weeks, rushing to buy more shares of stock, pulled forward by Dow visions of 6000, 7000, and onward to 10,000! But much like the bankrupt Credit Lyonnais, the lemmings will soon be seeking salvation from their government, and seeking to dump on someone else's shoulders the consequences of their own actions. It's all part of the recent "no-regrets" theory of finance, whereby if a financial contract or asset turns sour, you sue the institution that sold it to you, claiming you were "victimized". (If the reverse happens, and you win, you then explain to everyone what a brilliant investor or financial manager you are.)
It's the same cry-baby mentality evidenced by corporations which have suffered losses on their interest-rate swaps. When the swap generates a positive cash flow, the corporate treasurer is a hero. When the swap generates a negative cash flow, the board of directors yells "fraud" and sues the bank. The simplest concepts of risk management and responsibility have been tossed out the window. After all, we are all supposed to become billionaires in Bill Clinton's Go-Go 90s -- pockets flush with cash, and the booze and lines of coke waiting in the limo bar.
Are stocks overvalued? Let's do some back-of-the-envelope calculations. Stocks have historically yielded about 5 percentage points higher in dividend payouts and share buy-backs than interest payments on bonds. This is considered a risk premium for the uncertainty inherent in owning stocks as compared to the fixed payments promised by bond covenants. If we add 5 percent to the recent yield of about 7 percent on long-term U.S. Treasury securities, we obtain a stock yield of about 12 percent. That is the return that stock owners would ordinarily require.
But in the year 1995, dividends and stock buy-backs for publicly-traded companies were about $157 billion. The stock market value of these same firms is currently about $7.2 trillion. This implies a return of about 2.18 percent -- more than five times smaller than it should be.
For stocks to rise to a 12 percent yield would require the value of traded companies to fall to about $1.3 trillion. This value, $1.3 trillion, is about 18 percent of the current market value of $7.2 trillion. If we apply this ratio to the Dow Jones Industrial Average of about 6000 (although in truth the Dow is not really representative of the market as a whole), we obtain a projected Dow of 1090. (That is, $157 billion/.12 = $1.30833 trillion. Then 1.30833/7.2 =.1817. Finally. 6000 x .1817 = 1090.)
Of course, the relationships could hold in other ways without the stock market falling. Dividends and stock buy-backs could increase to $864 billion in 1996 and subsequent years. Fat chance. Or bond yields could fall to negative 3 percent. Fat chance again. Or bond yields could fall to zero and the risk premium on stocks fall to 2 percent, and the Dow could stay at around 6000. I seriously doubt it. Or bond yields could fall to zero and the risk premium on stocks fall to 1 percent, and the Dow could rise to 13,000! Think like this, and you are a lemming.
Something is going to give. In equilibrium (that is, after the shit has hit the fan), all of these numbers and relationships will have changed. But one thing is for sure: Stock prices are going to be a lot lower than they are now.
And the screams of the infants will be heard throughout the land.
- J. Orlin Grabbe, October 7, 1996
....We're $5 trillion in debt. You notice, neither party discussed the debt in the debates. That is the cancer that can wreck our country. Why won't they discuss it? Because they both created it. Now, neither party takes responsibility; each party blames the other party. Right? My philosophy is this. There was nobody else around; I guess they both did it.
You know, you can't blame anybody else; just two of them there at the table. We're $5 trillion in debt. Nobody can understand that, but we don't have $5 trillion of currency in print. So if we rounded up all the currency in print, we couldn't pay the debt. And Forrest Gump can understand that. I find it fascinating that the news media will not focus on these economic issues. And if you listen to them, every American should understand them in plain talk.
Seventy percent of our debt is financed short-term. That's like financing your house payment month to month. It'll break you when interest rates go up. Seventy percent of $5 trillion is $3.5 trillion. And every time interest rates go up 1 percent, the debt will go up $35 billion a year. You say, "But, Ross, interest rates are down." That's temporary. That's because the shell game we've been playing with the debt, the deficit and so on, and so forth. But down is relative, and we also know that interest rates cycle. And when they go up, we will pay a terrible price for not financing our debt in a responsible way.
The bad news is that, in spite of what you heard in the debates, because if you just listened casually in the debates, you'd think they'd taken care of this, right? "We've got the plans. It's all set. Don't worry. We're going to balance the budget and take care of the debt."
Here are the government's official numbers. They say the debt will rise from $5 trillion to $8 trillion by the year 2005. Is that what the bridge to the 21st century bought me? Five to $8 trillion.
Even worse, the president's Office of Management and Budget [projects] that the debt will be growing at the rate of $4.1 trillion a year in the year 2030. It took us.... 200 years to accumulate $5 trillion, and we're going to be creating four-fifths of that every year by the year 2030 because of our irresponsible spending.
In addition, our government forecasts that Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security in the year 2030, just those programs will cost $3.9 trillion a year. And what do the two candidates say? We're going to protect it as you know it. God bless you, we're not going to touch it..... We've got to take a look at those. And just at a glance you'll see why we have to redesign and reengineer them.
By the year 2050 the Social Security deficit will be $5.5 trillion, according to our government. And in the year 2060 our government forecasts that the typical worker will spend 40 percent of his paycheck just for Social Security. That won't work. We need to start the transition now.
You say, "Ross, I'm still not convinced." Then go to page 25. This is the world's best kept secret. If it ever appears on any of your newspapers or on the headlines in the evening news, send me a copy, please. This is really big news that never gets told. Page 25 of President Clinton's 1995 budget, the President of the United States tells you that the next generation to be born, any little baby born after 1995 will pay an 82 percent tax rate. Keep 18 cents out of every dollar they earn, the rest goes to Uncle Sam. That's the end of America. That's the end of the American dream. That's it. Once you know that, you should take action. We ignore it, don't print it.
Say, "Ross, I'm still not convinced." And I'll say, "Man, you are hard to convince." But here is my last shot. Go to page 18 of the president's 1997 budget and you will find that the President of the United States and our government says, using the accounting formula assets minus liabilities equal net worth, if I had a newspaper, God save America -- that won't happen. But if I did, that would be a headline: assets minus liabilities equal net worth -- our government tells you our net worth, we have a negative net worth of $2.98 trillion. That's the largest bankruptcy in the history of man and the best kept secret in the history of man. And the thing they didn't tell you is our government left out $17 trillion of unfunded federal guarantees -- unfunded federal guarantees -- that any publicly-owned corporation would have to include as liabilities.
So if you use the standards that they impose on public corporations, it's a $20 trillion negative net worth. Think of your parents and your grandparents. All my parents ever did was work and sacrifice all their lives for my sister and me, and now we are spending our children's money. And nothing could be more wrong, and we must stop it. We are approaching the brink of a financial disaster.
Everybody said, "Ross, how could that sort of thing happen?" Well, let's just use plain language and talk about it. We got too much money chasing too few stocks. The stock market's gone up forever. History tells us it will not go up forever; the stock market cycles. They said, "That's no problem; just the big shots are going to get killed." Sorry, folks, most of that money is pension funds. That's for ordinary folks. Then they have their 401(k) plans. That's for ordinary folks. Then a lot of them have gone into mutual funds because interest rates are so low. One of the reasons the stock market goes up is because interest rates are so low.
And when the meltdown occurs [italics mine], you say, "No problem; the government protects the small investor, the government protects the small investor's bank accounts, the government protects his pension funds." That's where the $17 trillion in unfunded federal guarantees are. There ain't no money there, folks. And when this meltdown occurs, the government's weak financial position will be a huge liability, in contrast to the Depression, when the financial strength of our government was a positive force in getting us through it.....
Note: This is not an endorsement of Ross Perot for president. I just found it interesting that, not only is there a candidate who seems to know how things work, he's not afraid to speak out about it, in contrast to the fairy
tale speeches we usually get from politicians. And the poor guy doesn't have a prayer of being elected.....
A. "Phoenix" -real portfolio, begun on October 1, 1995.
Original cost: $ 8,090.45
Present value: $ 7,811.32
Increase: $ -279.13 [-1.74%]
Yield: $ 311.53 [3.87%]
The performance of this portfolio and its predecessors ("Hedger's Delight", "Present and Future Income", "Crapshooter's Folly") from January 1987 to the present is +9.48%, for a compound annual rate of return of 0.93%.
B. "Professors' Investment Group (PIG)" - investment club portfolio.
COMMENT on "PIG": There is no change from the last issue, other than to the cash balance.
C. Fidelity IRA - real portfolio, includes commissions:
SUMMARY - IRA:
Original (1983-86) cost: $ 8,326.19
Present value: $18,792.06
Increase: $10,465.87 [126.77%]
Current yield: $ 226.055 [1.03%]
The performance of this portfolio (including its predecessors) from January 1, 1987 to the present is +71.35%, for a compound annual rate of return of 5.64%.
F. CREF Pension plan; I switch between indexed stock/bond/money funds:
Date Sold Bought
13Mar92 stock @ 56.65 MM @ 13.41
29Apr92 MM @ 13.48 bond @ 31.19
19Jun92 bond @ 32.14 MM @ 13.55
29Jun92 MM @ 13.57 stock @ 56.74
24Jul92 stock @ 56.76 MM @ 13.61
29Oct92 MM @ 13.72 stock @ 58.61
23Dec92 stock @ 61.48 MM @ 13.78
16Jan95 MM @ 14.83 equity-index @ 26.44
20Jan95 eq-index @ 26.19 MM @ 14.84
Values, 30Oct96: stock, 103.51; MM, 16.35
Gain, 1988: 18.91%; 1989: 14.48%; 1990: 8.28%; 1991: 27.93%; 1992: 10.20%; 1993: 3.08%; 1994: 4.07%; 1995: 4.80%
Gain, January 1 through September 30, 1996: 3.93% (5.28% annual rate)
Total gain since January 1, 1988 (8.5 years): 142.81%
Compound annual rate of return: 10.67% (My long-term target: in excess of 15%)
Gain shown excludes the impact of additional monthly cash contributions.
Buying CREF stock on January 1, 1988 and holding it gained 227.69%, for a compound annual rate of return of 14.53%.
COMMENT on "Timer's Trend" : Though "Timer's Trend" is still on a buy signal, the more sensitive 10% exponential says sell, with the current trend dead neutral (probably through the election). Caution!
{, } = "Timer's Trend" (4% and 10% exponential) SELL ({) or BUY (}) signal
=============================TIMER'S TREND===========================
Mon 18 Mar 96 . | . # }| 5683.60 |~.+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Tue 19 Mar 96 . | .# | 5669.51 | . + *
Wed 20 Mar 96 . | .# | 5655.42 | . + *
Thu 21 Mar 96 . | # | 5626.88 | . + *
Fri 22 Mar 96 . | .# | 5636.64 | . + *
Mon 25 Mar 96 . | .# | 5643.86 | .+ *
Tue 26 Mar 96 . | .# | 5670.60 | .+ *
Wed 27 Mar 96 . | .# | 5626.88 | .+ *
Thu 28 Mar 96 . | # | 5630.85 | .+ *
Fri 29 Mar 95 . | # | 5587.14 |~.*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mon 1 Apr 96 . | . # | 5637.72 | . + *
Tue 2 Apr 96 . | .# | 5671.68 | . + *
Wed 3 Apr 96 . | .# | 5689.74 | . + *
Thu 4 Apr 96 . | . # | 5682.88 | . + *
Mon 8 Apr 96 # . I . {| 5594.37 | + *
Tue 9 Apr 96 . I .# | 5560.41 |~+*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wed 10 Apr 96 . I# . | 5485.98 |+.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thu 11 Apr 96 . & . | 5487.07 + . *
Fri 12 Apr 96 . I . # | 5532.59 + . *
Mon 15 Apr 96 . I . # ]| 5592.92 | .+ *
Tue 16 Apr 96 . | . # }| 5620.02 |~.+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Wed 17 Apr 96 . I # | 5549.93 | . + *
Thu 18 Apr 96 . | . # | 5551.74 | . + *
Fri 19 Apr 96 . | . # | 5535.48 |~.~~*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mon 22 Apr 96 . | . # | 5564.74 | . + *
Tue 23 Apr 96 . | . # | 5588.59 | . + *
Wed 24 Apr 96 . | . # | 5553.90 | . + *
Thu 25 Apr 96 . | . # | 5566.91 | . + *
Fri 26 Apr 96 . | . # | 5567.99 | . + *
Mon 29 Apr 96 . | .# | 5573.41 | . + *
Tue 30 Apr 96 . | .# | 5569.08 | . + *
Wed 1 May 96 . | . # | 5575.22 | . + *
Thu 2 May 96 . #I . | 5498.27 |*.+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fri 3 May 96 . I # | 5478.03 |~.+~*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mon 6 May 96 . I #. | 5464.31 | + *
Tue 7 May 96 . I# . {| 5420.95 |~+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wed 8 May 96 . I #. | 5474.06 |+. *
Thu 9 May 96 . I .# ]| 5475.14 | + *
Fri 10 May 96 . | . # }| 5518.14 | .+ *
Mon 13 May 96 . | . # | 5582.60 |~.~+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Tue 14 May 96 . | . # | 5624.71 | . + *
Wed 15 May 96 . | . # | 5625.44 | . + *
Thu 16 May 96 . | .# | 5635.05 |~.~~+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Fri 17 May 96 . | . # | 5687.50 |~.~~+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Mon 20 May 96 . | . # | 5748.82 |~.~~+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Tue 21 May 96 . | .# | 5736.26 | . + *
Wed 22 May 96 . | . # | 5778.00 | . + *
Thu 23 May 96 . | # | 5762.12 | . + *
Fri 24 May 96 . | .# | 5762.86 | . + *
Tue 28 May 96 . |# . | 5709.67 | .+ *
Wed 29 May 96 . & . | 5673.83 | + *
Thu 30 May 96 . | .# | 5693.41 | + *
Fri 31 May 96 . I #. | 5643.18 |~*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mon 3 Jun 96 . I #. | 5624.71 |+.~~ *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tue 4 Jun 96 . | . # | 5565.71 |~ +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wed 5 Jun 96 . | . # | 5697.48 |~. +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Thu 6 Jun 96 . | #. | 5667.19 | .+ *
Fri 7 Jun 96 .# I . {| 5697.11 | + *
Mon 10 Jun 96 . I #. | 5687.87 | + *
Tue 11 Jun 96 . I #. | 5668.66 | + *
Wed 12 Jun 96 . I# . | 5668.29 |+. *
Thu 13 Jun 96 . & . | 5657.95 + . *
Fri 14 Jun 96 . I# . | 5649.45 |+. *
Mon 17 Jun 96 . I# . | 5652.78 |+. *
Tue 18 Jun 96 . & . | 5628.03 + . *
Wed 19 Jun 96 . & . | 5648.35 + . *
Thu 20 Jun 96 .# I . | 5659.43 + . *
Fri 21 Jun 96 . I #. | 5705.23 + . *
Mon 24 Jun 96 . I #. | 5717.79 + . *
Tue 25 Jun 96 . #I . | 5719.27 + . *
Wed 26 Jun 96 #. I . | 5682.70 |-. *
Thu 27 Jun 96 . & . | 5677.53 |-. *
Fri 28 Jun 96 . I . # | 5654.63 + . *
Mon 1 Jul 96 . | .# | 5729.98 + . *
Tue 2 Jul 96 . | #. }| 5720.38 |+. *
Wed 3 Jul 96 . |# . [| 5703.02 | + *
Fri 5 Jul 96 # . I . {| 5588.14 | *.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mon 8 Jul 96 # . I . | 5550.83 | *.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tue 9 Jul 96 . & . | 5581.86 | - *
Wed 10 Jul 96 .# I . | 5603.65 | .- *
Thu 11 Jul 96 # . I . | 5520.54 |~ *~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fri 12 Jul 96 .# I . | 5510.56 | . - *
Mon 15 Jul 96 # *. I . | 5349.51 |~.~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tue 16 Jul 96 # . I . | 5358.76 | . - *
Wed 17 Jul 96 . #I . | 5376.88 | . - *
Thu 18 Jul 96 . I # | 5464.18 |~.-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Fri 19 Jul 96 .# I . | 5426.82 | .- *
Mon 22 Jul 96 # . I . | 5390.94 | .- *
Tue 23 Jul 96 # . I . | 5346.55 *|~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wed 24 Jul 96 # . I . | 5354.69 | .- *
Thu 25 Jul 96 . #I . | 5422.01 | . - *
Fri 26 Jul 96 . I# . | 5473.06 |~.~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Mon 29 Jul 96 #. I . | 5434.59 | .- *
Tue 30 Jul 96 . #I . | 5481.93 | .- *
Wed 31 Jul 96 . & . | 5528.91 |-.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Thu 1 Aug 96 . | . # | 5594.75 +~.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Fri 2 Aug 96 . | . # | 5679.83 | +.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Mon 5 Aug 96 . | #. | 5674.28 | + *
Tue 6 Aug 96 . | #. | 5696.11 | .+ *
Wed 7 Aug 96 . | .# }| 5718.67 | . + *
Thu 8 Aug 96 . | # | 5713.49 | .+ *
Fri 9 Aug 96 . | # | 5681.31 | + *
Mon 12 Aug 96 . | .# | 5704.98 | .+ *
Tue 13 Aug 96 . #| . [| 5647.28 | + *
Wed 14 Aug 96 . | .# ]| 5666.88 | + *
Thu 15 Aug 96 . | .# | 5665.78 | + *
Fri 16 Aug 96 . | . # | 5689.45 | .+ *
Mon 19 Aug 96 . | . # | 5699.44 | .+ *
Tue 20 Aug 96 . | .# | 5721.26 | . + *
Wed 21 Aug 96 . | #. | 5689.82 | . + *
Thu 22 Aug 96 . | . # | 5733.47 |~.~ +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Fri 23 Aug 96 . | #. | 5722.74 | .+ *
Mon 26 Aug 96 . |# . | 5693.89 | .+ *
Tue 27 Aug 96 . | . # | 5711.27 | .+ *
Wed 28 Aug 96 . | # | 5712.38 | .+ *
Thu 29 Aug 96 . #| . | 5647.65 | + *
Fri 30 Aug 96 .# I . | 5616.21 *| +.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tue 3 Sep 96 . & . {| 5648.39 |+. *
Wed 4 Sep 96 . | # }| 5656.90 + . *
Thu 5 Sep 96 . #I . {| 5606.96 |-. *
Fri 6 Sep 96 . | .# }| 5659.86 + . *
Mon 9 Sep 96 . | . # | 5733.84 |~ +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Tue 10 Sep 96 . | .# | 5727.18 | .+ *
Wed 11 Sep 96 . | .# | 5754.92 | .+ *
Thu 12 Sep 96 . | . # | 5771.94 | . + *
Fri 13 Sep 96 . | . # | 5838.52 |~.~~ +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Mon 16 Sep 96 . | . # | 5889.20 |~.~~ +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Tue 17 Sep 96 . | # | 5888.83 | . + *
Wed 18 Sep 96 . | #. | 5877.36 | . + *
Thu 19 Sep 96 . | # | 5867.74 | . + *
Fri 20 sep 96 . | . # | 5888.46 | .+ *
Mon 23 Sep 96 . | #. | 5894.74 | .+ *
Tue 24 Sep 96 . | .# | 5874.03 | .+ *
Wed 25 Sep 96 . | # | 5877.36 | .+ *
Thu 26 Sep 96 . | .# | 5868.85 | .+ *
Fri 27 Sep 96 . | # | 5872.92 | .+ *
Mon 30 Sep 96 . | . # | 5882.17 | .+ *
Tue 1 Oct 96 . | .# | 5904.90 | .+ *
Wed 2 Oct 96 . | . # | 5933.97 | . + *
Wed 2 Oct 96 . | . # | 5933.97 |~.~+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Thu 3 Oct 96 . | .# | 5932.85 | . + *
Fri 4 Oct 96 . | . # | 5992.86 |~.~~+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Mon 7 Oct 96 . | . # | 5979.81 | . + *
Tue 8 Oct 96 . | # | 5966.77 | . + *
Wed 9 Oct 96 . |# . | 5930.62 | . + *
Thu 10 Oct 96 . | #. | 5921.67 | .+ *
Fri 11 Oct 96 . | . # | 5969.38 | .+ *
Mon 14 Oct 96 . | . # | 6010.00 | .+ *
Tue 15 Oct 96 . | # | 6004.78 | .+ *
Wed 16 Oct 96 . | # | 6020.81 | .+ *
Thu 17 Oct 96 . | . # | 6059.20 |~.~+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Fri 18 Oct 96 . | . # | 6094.23 | . + *
Mon 21 Oct 96 . | # | 6090.87 | .+ *
Tue 22 Oct 96 . |# . | 6061.80 | .+ *
Wed 23 Oct 96 . |# . | 6036.46 | .+ *
Thu 24 Oct 96 . I# . | 5992.48 | + *
Fri 25 Oct 96 . I #. | 6007.02 |+. *
Mon 28 Oct 96 . I# . | 5972.73 |+. *
Tue 29 Oct 96 . I # | 6007.02 |+. *
Wed 30 Oct 96 . I #. | 5993.23 |+. *
=====================================================================
[, ] = 4% exponential change unconfirmed by 10% exponential (not a signal).
@ = market overbought or oversold. I or & (on baseline) = 10% exponential SELL.