1) "PSYCLE SENSE sm": new:

Neat, been getting more, and broadening, pops, and many issues I gave you are no longer at lows, so still-buyable list shrinking a bit, as alwasy occurs when we are correct....but, what a good period for us, yes ?

But -- as usual, many are already approaching their initial upside/resistance levels, and/or where they broke down from, right ? Hence, the Q L % G's in section (3) today....I am also rechecking my Put lists for you, and probably plenty of those remain, on/after strength, while plenty of Long buys remain as well....so, do Not 'begin to get all super-bullish' here, dig ? too many people and Media are doing so, their having missed the lows, as usual....so going slower from here....

Oh, and only now does the Finl. Media let us know that a guy like Bernie Schaeffer saw "huge put buying normally associated with climax market bottoms, a week or two ago"....but he then hedges, saying, "the market can always become even more pessimistic, it is not until this sentiment reading peaks, and starts to fall again, that we will see a final bottom"....so, Bernie, which is it ? now, or later ? no help....he also said, "just because the PE's on Semi. stocks are low, does not mean they are cheap...." uh, since when are they now "low" ? compared to what ? anyway, he did mention doing an 'options straddle' on them, which, strategy-wise, makes some sense - if their option premiums were not so high ....last, he currently has been neutral, not bullish, citing lask of enuf pessimism among traders and NL writers, even after recent drops....he sees potential to retest recent lows in SPX and OEX....we shall see....so far, we have done better in this rally, than he has, yes ?

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

a) Important Industry Group (Rotation) notes:
1) we are very proud of, as usual, being the first and only, to have given out the depressed Trans., Rails, stocks, right from bottoms, up nicely, and, still, NO one else out there likes them, yet....of course, the moment they begin to like them, well, you'll know what to do then, ay ? finally, Thu., CNBC mentioned they are THE best-performing I.G. so far in 2000....even with "higher Energy costs/prices to them", interesting, huh ? NO 'links' ....2) and, as expected, the March T-bond is pulling back, under 100 again.... 3) also note pops among the I-was-again-the-first-and-only-to-give-out-from-lows, truly depressed Hospital/Care stocks, like, ALI, HRC, LTC, MT, HUM, OXHP, BOL, EYE, STE, RX, you were specifically given herein at lows, as usual, etc....even better, that I am also the ONLY guy to have given THC, HCA< health-type Puttables from recent highs, even with recent bounces, another good example of 'I.G.R., from my Booklet....just as with the Energy sectors moving separately/independently of each other....

b) more, misleading, sensationalized, Late, and/or improper/incorrect comments from the Financial Media, Reporters, etc.:
1) the idiots at CNBC, Wed. 8 am, reporting that, "lloks like the baby bells, like, SBC and BLS and VZ, are becoming much more attractive than the WCOM, T, LU, stocks" - very late, and exactly the opposite of what they should be doing, as usual, right ? the pattern rarely changes.... 2) and, L.A.T. 10/30, late, as usual, front-page headline, "Morale at local companies deflates as stock options bubble bursts....workers share angst about plunging stock prices".... 3) then, they also had item, of amazing uselessness, headline, "Markets may be affected by lingering concerns"....hmmmm, what a valuable statement....NOT. ...4) CNBC's B. Pisani (don't get me started) Wed. 11 am, said, "no one is concerned about a fall-back here, since we have come so far so fast, and so, the market has become trendless...."

4) the ignorant guy reporter on CNBC, Wed. 11:10, actually misled greatly, saying, "Semi. stocks have been trading all over the map lately...." , when, he should have said, 'they have corrected as would normally be expected after nice rises', but did not....and these reporters have no liability, do they ? ....5) Tyler Matheson, CNBC, Wed., 11:30, misled big-time, saying, "shares of COVD are SURGING, up $ 1. to 6 1/4, on news it's pres. resigned...." Uh, excuse me ? 'surging' ? and, still way down from $ 70. high, yes ? and these guys get paid for this ? ....6) then, CNBC's 'NASD wal-guy' Tom Costello, Wed., misled again, saying, "the Semi. stocks are getting slammed", when, in fact, most all are already up....next.... 7) then, Thu. 8:30, CNBC finally had pres. of our HRC on - again, as usual, only after stock way up at high - when I was first/only to give you herein from its lows, when CNBC reported super-negatively on it, remember ? the pattern rarely changes....

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) ....

d) more, likely late, incorrect, and/or misleading, comments, from Brokerage firms, NL writers, Analysts, economists, Money Managers, etc.:
1) thanks for nothing, late, as usual, as S & P Outlook (don't getme started), Wed., says, they think the previous, unpredicted-by-them drops in many stocks has been 'overdone' (well, duh), and they love 25 blue-chip names, like, BMY, BAC, INTC, PLT, XLNX, but, of course, none really cheap or very attractive today.... 2) a possibly correct assessment from MER, Wed., saying, Areo./Def. stocks may have gotten ahead of ethmselves here, like, BA, RTN, LMT, LEA, etc. 3) but then, same day, MER rec'd. Oil Svc. stocks, even up here, saying, "this will be more like 1995, than 1997, ahead, for these stocks...." Uh, gee, guys, GLM which they mentioned was only $ 4, in 1995, and, in 1997, it was $ 20 to 35, before falling as I was the first/only to have predicted herein from their highs, back to $ 8. before big predicted-here rise to $ 34. again (double-tops, as I also predoicted herein)....anyway, where they get even the remotest analogy of 'now' to '1995' in this I,g,. is beyond logic, ay ? Remember, they hated them at lows, and loved them at both highs, as usual, yes ? next....

Paul rabbit, said 8/25 much higher, wrong, etc.
e) more general items proving why one should probably ignore 95 % of everything else out there:
1) not that such an item has VER been even remotely of D.A.F.P.P.V. with respect to stock prices moves, but, Tues., our Govt. reported that "consumer confidence" fell to new one-year LOWS recently....further confirming my among-the-first-to-predict economic slowing trend continuing....but, that 'new home sales surged' + 9.2 % in Sept., so, useless and confusing, as usual....

So, as you have seen, for years now, how well one does, often, just "doing" the best 'individual' stocks, and rotating 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 for you, 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 % percentage 'Gains' are just logical ESTIMATES for L.T., ITM options, where exist, and/or on Margin, where no options exist....