1) "PSYCLE SENSE sm": new:
Again, seeing more EVB's and bases forming among our depressed stocks....and getting some renewed bounces among longsiders in section (4)....while, as expected, more 'recently-declined-from-extended-patterns' stocks, having V.S.T. bottoms and bounces off support/necklines....things are pretty-much going as planned in our still-split market....

The number of 'New 52-week Lows' in the Value Line composite index, broke above a 2-year high recently....But, I have simultaneously been seeing higher "OBV" levels in many now-depressed 'old economy' stocks, 'under the surface', which NO one else around is mentioning (as usual, right ? I am often the first/only to see/say such things, but you already know that), something that happened before every future rise in 'old economy stocks' since 1970 or so....So many section (3) longside buys have remained around suggested prices, for so long, you have (had) no excuse for not catching many of them, since late last year, right ?

Meanwhile, as I mentioned, the "Russell 2000 index" makes new highs, as shockingly-even-more-parabolic stocks contradict their generally-assumed 'small-cap' nature, making this index NO longer representative of what it once did....As with many indexes and technical indicators over the years, things have changed, and one must be aware of that, as you now are....For instance, many 'options' and short-sale 'ratios/numbers' don't mean as much, as "D.A.F.P.P. factors", any more, because institutions have hedged all sorts of ways, skewing the raw data reported, etc. That's why we concentrate on the only things that normally cannot be lied about, or manipulated, like price charts, volume, sentiment, and 'things printed/shown on the Media' patterns....

But, as I have been intimating recently, we are seeing still more signs of 'distribution' (early rises, then fading, longer EVT's forming, front-page coverage in Media sources, super-parabolic patterns, capitulation among bears, etc.), outside a small number of super-parabolic stocks....and yesterday, I received special word from one of the only guys around to have actually called the 1987 crash, the drop in 1994, and the big correction I also foresaw (predicted while I was on TV at the time), from July 1998....Like me, he also got his initial bearish readings last Oct./Nov., and now, we both see enough opportunities around here, to have at least SOME puts here, from my lists, with stops, diversified.... So, I am beginning to assume that some more recent 'necklines' are going to be broken (below), ahead....down towards more 200 DMA's....remember, as I told you earlier, the Feb. to May period, is often ripe for Tech. corrections, as well.... Yet, like me, he is still awaiting broader tops to form among indexes and extended stocks, but is on alert here and now, as we are....Last, "his" downside target, when/if correct, would be to around Dow 7555, later in the year, with plenty of S.T. rallies along the way down....I value this guy's opinion, especially when it matches mine....the next correction (or the first one for the super-parabolics) is likely to come 'from out of the blue', to the fundamentalists....

Again, this is primarily only for the 'Extended' stocks, with stops anyway, and have NO emotion, nor 'scenario', nor unrealistic, huge downside expectations, attached to it, right ? So, you may now want to actually lighten-up in any equity 'pension/retirement accounts and/or big-name M. Funds' monies you may have been fortunate to have ridden up in in recent years, going to a bit more cash, now, and each S.T. period, forward, from here, at a minimum....otherwise, it si going to be interesting to see how 'lucky parabolic-holding' people act, after giving back 20-40 % of their paper gains ahead in more of those stocks....

Oh, and I am definitely going to change 'the middle of the NL access code' again early this month, watch for that....real soon, again, but probably for the last time into June, for a while....I am still trying to establish a 'money mgmt. General Partnership', while retaining my NL, Booklets, and hourly-lessons-consulting services, hopefully adding seminars and special reports and a few more Booklets ? and, maybe, an "e-zine" on the web, and another simple website, and hoping for new business partners who are 'the real thing' finally.... Meanwhile, I continue to investigate what B-firms may also have to offer me, and clients, for possible 'direct money mgmt.' How stressful and multi-layered is that....just trying to best serve my public....

Please appreciate, how much time/effort I put in, to put ALL applicable, staged, stocks, which fit learnable, and actionable, "PSYCLE sm" patterns, into each NL....Sometimes fewer, sometimes more, as befits market conditions....again, the "Most Actionable, Do-able, stocks, Here/Now", are in Section (3). And, the "Learning/feeling/Sentiment/commentary" items, are in section (2). Longer lists, and Industry Groups, are in section (6) and (7).... and all "follow-ups", are in sections (4) and (5). Of course, if you do not own any of the stocks in sec. (4) or (5), you may choose to save time by ignoring those if you wish....Eight, very clear NL "sections". You have No excuses for not taking advantage, over time.

2) "What's Been Said, and What I've Read":

a) Important Industry Group (Rotation) notes:1) giving Value Line some props, 2/25 issue, they mention how depressed the Railroads are now, even fundamentally, though "the prospect of further federal regulation is a cloud over them...." They rate most as 'attractive long-term'....as you know, we agree.... 2) I know, you probably don't care, because they are not super-sexy, but our REIT's are shaping up again, technically, chart-wise....realize, they are forming longer bases, and you know what that means at some point....you may get, both, big pot. dividends, plus pot. stock rises ? not bad, for 'safer' money/accounts, ay ? ....3) again, I am shocked at renewed pops among parabolic Semi. stocks, Tues., some breaking pot. top patterns....oy....but, again, no biggie, not much damage to us....it's just another I.G., right ? ....4) while still likely to form bases, some of those depressed Grocery/Food/Retail stocks I gave you recently, are trying to really bottom here....with some finally actually having initial 'dead-cat bounces'....

5) with JEF, EGRP, SCH, AMTD, up, as given you herein near lows in bases, I see MWD broke out (Q,S put L), and MER making a new high, so gotta mean something, as 'brokerage' stocks, separate, in action, from 'bank' stocks.... please re-read my "I.G. rotation" booklet....could OCN be next ? again, I was the first/only to give these as buys near lows....hope you got one.... 6) and, are some of my Insur. EVB's done on the downside, like, XRX, CNC, UNM, MNY, etc. ? especially in light of takeover offer for AET, Insur. stocks are getting real cheap, L.T. ....7) noticing, with CCL and RCL down nicely since Value Line and everyone else loved them, and I gave them out specifically herein as Puttables, the 'travel' I.G. is another decent example of my concept in action....I (alone, as usual) specifically mentioned earlier herein, how they were assuming endless growth and expansion spending, and that would hurt them for a while.... 8) while I know, and knew, nothing of them, the 'superconductor stocks' I.G. is now parabolic, and I hope to catch its imminent top here for you ahead....

9) I see that the major stock indexes in China and South Korea, actually fell -6.4 % and -5.3 % respectively, Monday....this may be beginning of the end for them, S.T., since they are parabolic, and directly relating to mostly 'semi./tech.' stocks, dig ? how come they are no longer parabolically rising in those countries of origin ? BTW, that item was 'buried' in the WSJ and the L.A.Times....sure, only when/if/after they fall bigger, will "the Media" report it as a 'new trend'....are you learning the pattern ? ...10) with more strength being observed in "desk Drive" stocks, we were, again, the first/only to have given the dperessed ones to you herein at their recent lows....like, IOM, WDC, MUEI, DSS, etc.... 11) let's see if 'sell on the news' works with COMS, soon, being super-hot-parabolic-overcovered/loved ....While I was among the first to specifically give COMS out herein in its depressed base, mid-20's, not too long ago (when CNBC and analysts hated it, recall) for a nice big S.T. Gain, I missed the parabolic rise, as usual.... 12) last, following-up from last NL here, with Crude over $ 32 now (being among the first/only to have predicted the rise from $ 10 herein for you, but the recent rise over $ 26 missed by me, remember), see NBL, MHR, SUN, WEL, GOU, given you recently, rising nicely, even as I may have misread the recent relative weakness in Oil Svc. stocks....of course, all that matters is what the 'stocks' themselves do....so, we are now 5 out of 7 in Energy-stocks predictions, so you have done VERY well overall, the last 2+ years herein, in them....could GOU, be next ? wish I could find more still-depressed Energy stocks for you, but few exist....

b) more, misleading, sensationalized, late, and/or improper/incorrect comments from the Financial Media, Reporters, etc.: 1) Tom (I led Jim on, made promises, then treated him badly, for no logical reason, failing again to help my readers) Petruno, L.A. Times column, 2/27, "Chasing Hot Stocks", wrote, "who wants to admit they know nothing about the Tech. stocks they just bought on margin ?" alluding to the ridiculous TV quiz shows recently, saying, "maybe CNBC can pick up where Fox leaves off." But he did at least mention, that, shockingly, 'mutual fund money inflows" topped in 1997, at $ 227 bill., then fell in 1999 to $ 186 bill., most all into 'momentum' (read: parabolic, late) stocks....He concludes: "maybe it's time to say: Welcome to the first Bear market of the new millenium." wow....I say, there is no way this guy is going to be correct from here....from Dow 9900.... 2) now, that said, L.A. TImes, 2/29, front-page main headline, "New record set for M. Fund inflows in Jan." had the opposite message....oy....see why I view most Media messages with skepticism ? Of interest, the previous record inflow was set in Jan. '97.... after which, the NASDAQ index, at 1300, was flat-to-down, till spring '97, before rising to 1750 in Oct. '97, then having a nice drop for months thereafter....and the Dow, fell, from 6750 to 6100, before rising to 7800 by end of July '97, then had that BIG drop thereafter....Meaning, these kind of 'fundamental front-page Media items' tend to occur only AFTER big rises, and often presage Lower performance for a while, dig ? More 'caveat emptor' for the parabolics, ay ? The vast majority of 'inflows' flowed into the already-super-extended Techs, right ? Where were these people until recently ? When I was giving out tons of those semis/comp. stocks at single-digit prices on Silicon Investor and in this NL, as "PSYCLE sm" buys, in 1997 and 1998, I got little or no repsonse back then, dig ? The 'latecomers' must get whacked ahead....

3) same article, they wrote, 'the biggest surprise is the heavy inflow of money into Foreign M. Funds, taking in more cash in Jan. 2000 than in all of 1999, with "23 % of all Fund money going into Intl. issues" (and, over 50 % into the parabolic Techs, remember), wow....(this item of potential stock-timing help to investors was also 'buried' in the article, but don't get me started....at least now YOU know something few others do). Once again, we see 'the analysts/money mgrs./individuals buying late/high, dig ? Where were all these people when I gave Asian and Latin stocks at their 1998 lows herein and on TV as super-depressed "PSYCLE sm" buys ? as usual....not listening or caring....they ONLY love them AFTER parabolic rises....the pattern rarely changes....be aware....

c) more incorrect/misleading/sensationalized, and/or improper comments, from Fundamentalists/Companies, newspapers/magazines, etc., vs. illogical/Contrary/Unlinkable, past/present/future stock price moves:1) economically/fundamentally, "U.S. Capacity Utilization" looks like a saucer, beginning to rise again....after been falling for years.... 2) an actually a potentially L.T. correct treatment of Homebase (I gave you herein as buy near recent lows) by L.A. Times, 2/25, "HBI. plans rebound with accessory sales", mentioned a -44 % drop in earnings, a Q loss, lower sales, mounting competitive pressures, etc. Its stock broke, for a Q,S,L herein, but, that may have been 'it', 'on the bad news' ? ....3) an L.A. Times letter to editor, "Boeing must have won the lottery" points out that "BA" had huge cost overruns, and still received huge bonuses from the Govt. last year, writing, "do you get bonuses for bad mgmt., bad planning, underbidding, lying, stealing, and overruns ?" I might add, with Govt. subsidies as well, yes ? Ho hum, your tax dollars at work.... great system, huh.... 4) Monday, after recent V.S.T. corrections in many stocks, I heard/read several Media people actually saying, "despite concerns about the T-bond yield rising to 6.19 %"....excuse me ? hadn't yield FALLEN from 6.75 to 6.0 % recently ? since when is 6.19 % "rising" ? see what I mean by the Finl. Media's often 'improper perspective' and 'misleadingly trying to create a story where none exists' ? Rates are DOWN, not 'rising'....They didn't even show a proper chart of 'yields'.... 4) all's right in corporate love and war ? L.A. Times, 2/29, "CEO's compensation soars as Western Digital flounders", pointed out how, ridiculously cheap stock options negotiated by their CEO when WDC stock was around $ 50. (now around $ 4., right ?), still made him $ 1.7 mm last year, even as WDC cp. had mounting losses, and its stock fell a LOT....geez....is there no shame ? they also said he announced his retirement....how do YOU view this ?

d) more, likely late, incorrect, and/or misleading, comments, from Brokerage firms, NL writers, Analysts, economists, Money Managers:1) hey, Value Line, 2/25, said, "we think the pace of business activity will ease slightly over the next few quarters....growth will fall, and be less than the rate we saw last year...." They must be reading my output.... 2) DLJ's Tom Galvin made a very confusing, and possibly incorrect, remark, "What appears incresingly clear is that the money flows generated by the hot economy, and earnings, simply aren't big enough to accomodate very many stocks anymore." Excuse me ? Has he seen the hundreds of parabolic stocks in recent years ? Where did THAT money come from ? And, with supposedly 'old economy' stocks so depressed recently, wouldn't even lower amounts of money, move much-lower-priced-stocks, anyway, if the laws of supply-and-demand work ? He says, 'with so much money going into the sexy stocks, there is no money left to go into the laggards'....Oh yeah ? How come he did not predict that trend before it started ? so why should we listen to/follow him now ? let's fade him, and accumulate the depresseds, and sell the extendeds.... 3) I suggested last NL that "CNXT" might have topped....I had no idea an SG Cowen analyst downgraded it Monday from a "strong buy" to a "buy", at $ 105+ (note, already down from 131), and it corrected off its EVT top, to 90 so far....Interesting, as I taught you in my "Scenarios" booklet (re-read it please), he still rates it a 'buy' (huh ? don't get me started), but, somehow still also warns about its future fundamentals ? See what these guys do ? unclear, almost always....and, of course, they almost never give outright 'sell' nor 'hedge' nor 'protect' positions....as most B-firms do not allow their analysts to serve their clients interests first, as you know ....Last, all 15 analysts following CNXT still rate it a 'buy' or 'strong buy', still, way up here....not a 'bear' in sight here....was parabolic....oh, and it just approached its 50 DMA already....

4) L.A. TImes, 2/29, VG big article, "chief of major Tech. M. Fund, focusing on less-risky stocks....trailing many peers....", Chip Morris, mgr. of T. Rowe Sci. & Tech. Fd., acknowledging he also missed the further-parabolic-rises occuring in 1999, "is lagging many of its tech-fund competitors...rising concern about tech-stk. relative values...." The mgr. correctly points out that the rise in Techs actually dates way back to 1983-84 (a period I have mentioned herein before, but, of course, no one cares about what happened before the last few yeqrs, right ?), and that there have been 13 declines/corrections of 15 % or more in Tech. stks. since then, and, the currecnt parabolic rises are 2 1/2 times more, so far, than ANY previous rally seen in these stocks over any time period from a corrective bottom....Obviously, as those of us who failed to (or should I say, refused to) blindly buy only after huge parabolic rises knows, he has been seeing a 'yellow flag' for quite a while....saying, "everyone in this biz has a vested interest in saying things are great, just relax, these (parabolic) stocks will grow into these (ridiculously high) valuations....but I cannot honestly look in the mirror and say, 'there's no problem here.' There IS a problem here, it could be 2 years, two months, or two hours from now....Tech. stocks could fall by 30 % or more, and still be high from historic norms." He also mentioned, as I did here for you, that many 'previously-small-cap stocks, are not big-cap stocks, putting his Fund at a competitive disadvantage...Kudos, guy, we should talk.

But, at the end of the article, of course, it turns out, his favorites here, remain, ORCL, YHOO, ADI, CSCO, MSFT, PMTC, NOVL, WCOM, VOD, NOK, XLNX, MXIM...I ask, why ? no stops ? no depressed stocks ? oy....Last, he reiterated, how, even assuming 30-50 times sales' levels on parabolics, fundamentally (which is being amazingly generous, dig ?), "at that multiple you're still DOWN 50 % from their current mkt. cap. on dozens of parabolic stocks, from recent levels." GET IT ? So, his definition of 'less-risky' is still pretty darn risky, yes ? I guess it is relative....'Less-risky' to me, is 'near the lows, with a close stop, diversified, etc." Oh, and, given his unlikeliness of outperforming in the future, why interview a guy like this, when the TImes can interview a guy who buys truly low, uses stops, and has occasional Puts when warranted ? But, at least he made some sense, rare for his industry these days....

e) more general items proving why one should probably ignore 95 % of everything else out there: 1) another in a long line of useless-but-heavily-financially-back 'advice' from the "Useless Fools", L.A. Times, 2/29, wrote them, saying, in 21997, he bought a bunch of extended Tech. stocks, and suffered huge losses, then, he 'panicked and sold several of the stocks without reviewing the original logic of my investment or the fundamentals of the companies...they all rose tremendously thereafter...I missed out on huge gains....while not a naive investor, I was unprepared for such drastic declines...." To which the aptly-named 'Fools' replied, "when a stock you own plunges in value, it's time not to impulsively sell...it's often profitable to simply hang on patiently." Huh ? They call that helpful 'advice' ? "Hanging on" to a big decliner ? Hmmmm, what about teaching people about chart patterns, sentiment patterns, stops, I.G. rotation, etc. I guess when you have no risk, as 'the Fools' have, your output doesn't have to be valuable or helpful anyway, ay ? Gosh, they have been such a disservice to millions of people for years so often.... 2) L.A. Times, 2/29, front-page, "Growth (rate) of Orange County Home Values Slowed in '99", said what I was the first/only to have predicted herein (and, as usual, got venom saying, but I digress) that, while still slightly higher in pockets, the majority, the 'easy part' of the rise in R.E. prices in So. Calif. occured Before last year....the subheadline, "but analysts are not worried by the (new) trend", is the normal "PSYCLE sm" behavior in this 'extended' stage, yes ? They wrote that, finally, many places have "recouped what had been lost during the downturn from 1990 tops" (which, remember, I was the first/only to have predicted, in riting, and on TV, back then). As you know, what worries me here (a VERY lonely opion, BTW, as usual), is a possible bigger correction among Tech.parabolic stocks, hurting R.E. values in Calif. and elsewhere, as 'lucky yuppies' feel damage for the first time in their lives....Remember, some underlying 'fundamentals' in Calif. are likely to continue to rise, (like, "exports", etc), even AS some home prices, and stock prices, correct, dig ?

f) a little item of interest: L.A. Times, 2/29, the pres. of the SEC is "supporting a bill that would dramatically reduce trading transaction fees levied to investors and firms"....rare....cool....we shall see....they said, the SEC has been collecting 5 times their annual budgetary needs....the 'overage' going to your Govt....wow....great system, huh....Meanwhile, tons of semi-crooks get rich, hurting millions of people, and the industry, with little or no punishment....

As you have seen, for years now, how well one does, often, just "doing" the best 'individual' stocks, and Ind. Groups, chart-technically, and sentiment-wise, mostly long-side, while ignoring, or going contrary to, 95 % of all Media messages, and "indexes/averages" comments, from the peanut gallery ? By just getting my output, alone, you do much better, and save time, by not having to even try to "seek, and process" tons of other, useless fundamental info., anyway....and we also help remove potential emotional problems before they begin.

3) Most recent Hypothetical "PSYCLE sm" transactions, to be mimicked, and referred back to:

Always remember to view "1-year-at-least past" charts of everything you can view, herein, along with their 200 day moving averages (DMA's), to "see/learn" the "PSYCLE patterns", and see where/when stocks in section (3) were Hypothetically bought near lows, and put near highs....all % 'Gains' are just logical estimates for L.T., ITM options, if exist, and/or on margin, where no opitons exist....

Also re-read "the Guide" for how I derive the Estimated % percentage Gains I show herein, on assumed Hypothetically 'closed-out' trades (always assumed to have been in Options, where applicable/suitable, and on margin where available/suitable/logical, and on a cash basis where not, as per "PSYCLE sm" tenets)....and when you see "bal." here in section (3), that means, "the balance" of assumed long positions, assuming an initial "1/2 pos." sale....and, "css" means "covered (previous) short sale", where no puts options existed....