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://nick.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 situation has changed dramatically from a couple of years ago, but you do not seem to be aware of this. Judging from the quotes in your Y2K section I can see why.
At least you have noticed that Gary North has "an axe to grind". That's putting it mildly. But the real problem with North is not his bizarre agenda, but that he does not have the slightest clue about technology. About history, maybe, but computers, nada. Just the other day I saw the most hilarious hoax posted on his [web] site and he bought it hook, line and sinker. [One in which the first letter of each sentence spells out "PAUL MILNE IS A BIG FAT IDIOT". /Nick] He simply doesn't have the skills to tell the difference between complete bullshit and a plausible scenario.
[For example,] the Euro implementation.... job was also supposed to be impossible to complete on schedule, estimated to be six times the size of Y2K, and Capers Jones, patron saint of doomers, estimated that of 2 million affected systems, half a million would not be fixed in time. Gary North expounded: "The deadline is fixed: Jan. 1, 1999. It has been trumpeted for years. It has been fundamental to one of the great public relations campaigns of all time. But Europe will not make this deadline. The world will know on Jan. 4". Uh huh, I'm still waiting.
Why are you still quoting Ed Yourdon? The guy who wrote Decline and Fall of the American Programmer at the moment when the profession was just moving into its golden age? You just can't get more wrong than that. The guy is a total laughingstock in the programming community. Besides, he has left the Y2K debate like a yellow dog with his tail between his legs, hoping to get a head start on his rehabilitation.
Cory Hamasaki? He's no programmer, he's an archaeologist! He's been out of the loop for so long, his opinions on Y2K are about as valuable as Alan - I wrote a few lines of COBOL 35 years ago - Greenspan. Then there is Paul Milne. He's just a plain, stupid, idiot, who makes an ass of himself on a daily basis.
If you want to know what to expect come next January, you would do better than to listen to these yo-yos, or
looking at Gallup polls, for that matter. There are plenty of real experts out there with solid reputations. It
seems to me you used to read Peter de Jager. He probably knows more about Y2K than anyone on the
planet.... Peter's position has shifted a great deal. Perhaps not as much as I would like, but last time I heard
from him he sounded pretty burned out and he was lamenting the fact that he was fighting a multi-front war. I
am sorry to see the way he is being treated by doomers these days. They call him a traitor, a victim of bi-polar
disorder, or darkly suggest that the government has "got to him". But when the dust all settles, I am confident
that history will bear him out as something of a hero.
As for the Gallup Poll you cite in the June issue, you missed a glaring anomaly that explains why the general
public is very unreliable in giving a clear picture regarding Y2K. Take a look at Figure 14. Only 7% thought
their own banks would not be able to solve Y2K problems in time. But the responses to banks in general were
very different, with 44% saying people would lose access to cash, and 29% that banks would lose track of
people's money. Heh, that's a problem!
So why the huge discrepancy? Actually this is a phenomenon that has been widely discussed amongst Y2K remediators. In fact, one recent conference was entitled "I'm O.K., you're not O.K.". There is tendency to think that other members in your industry, especially competitors, are way behind your own company. And all the other guys think the same. The not-so-polite term for this in remediation circles is "The Circle Jerk". It's an inevitable, behavioral kind of thing, and all of the statements of "Y2K readiness" will not change that. You might as well expect a Marine to say that the Army and Navy are just as good. Ain't gonna happen.
The fact is that the result of Y2K is now a foregone conclusion. If you think the next recession or market crash will be precipitated by excessive consumer debt, trade imbalances, cheap money, overvalued stocks, etc. you can make a good case, and I may very well agree with you. But if think that Y2K is going to deliver the fateful blow, then you are sadly mistaken.
Let me clear about one thing. I'm not saying there are not going to be problems. I'm not saying that computer systems are not going to do wacky and inconvenient things. What I am saying is that there will be no SIGNIFICANT increase in these kinds of problems due to Y2K. Y2K bugs that sneak through remediation will simply get lost in the noise of the gazillion things that go wrong each and every day.
One of the most ridiculous myths that has been perpetuated is this idea that there is lots of 30-year-old legacy code that has not changed, is undocumented, and the source code lost, and now nobody knows how to fix it. What planet are these people on? Application software is a living, breathing beast that requires the constant ministrations of an army of worker bees.
Every time government comes in with a new piece of legislation that affects every payroll in the country a mountain of maintenance work is created. For example, I worked on the introduction of the "Goods and Services Tax" in Canada about 10 years ago, which affected nearly every transaction in the country. Unlike Y2K, which is actually quite straightforward, I was dealing with a myriad of rules: a donut is taxable, a dozen are not, a tongue depressor is taxable, unless it is part of medical kit, in which case it is not. Compared to that nightmare (which had a deadline every bit as unmovable) Y2K is a walk in the park.
These huge maintenance projects are not new; what is new is that the general public has suddenly taken an interest in the activities of a bunch of nerds and geeks. And due to these anxieties managers and bureaucrats have figured out that budget allocations for anything Y2K is the fast track for approval. So you have a situation, for example, where the U.S. Congress passes legislation regarding health care reform that had implications to all links in the delivery of patient care, the HMOs and insurers, hospitals, practitioners, nursing homes, Medicare etc, without funding earmarked for the gigantic number of software fixes required. A huge problem which to my knowledge did not get any media attention. It's shady, but I can't honestly blame institutions for slapping a Y2K sticker on this work in order for it to be properly funded.
If the upshot of Y2K was that leaders would finally start thinking about the consequences to software infrastructure of their decisions, then all of this current silliness would be worth it. But I'm NOT holding my breath.
As for publishing any of this stuff.... well sure, but it certainly was not my intent to attack your position on Y2K in front of your readership. I was merely hoping to spur you to provide more balanced coverage on this issue. As a fellow contrarian, I admire certain aspects of your commentary, and even your dogged, though somewhat misplaced, bearishness. I just think it would be a pity to see your credibility undermined by predicting an economic impact to Y2K. Let Yardeni hang himself - he can afford it.
("Ben" has 20 years' experience in application software development and maintenance in the accounting, petroleum, transportation, legal and health care industries. For the past couple of years he has been heavily involved in Y2K remediation - professionally with legacy systems for a number of Canadian hospitals, and in a more casual capacity as a member of the Internet community grappling with Y2K.)
I would surmise that the Y2K remediation is progressing well at Ben's company; and I have a similar situation at my job, where Y2K is repaired in due course with ongoing application support or PC and Mac upgrades; and it's natural to project your own experience onto the world at large. I even have friends, or friends of friends, in large mainframe shops like Ben's, where the remediation is done, finished, complete, and the mainframes are chugging along successfully, doing their thing. (Conversely, I don't have any contacts where people have told me their organizations won't make it.)
I had hoped that by March the Y2K picture would be clearer. Here it is, July, and I'm still unable to decipher a clear picture of what will and won't work early in 2000, and how devastating the economic effects will be. It has been devilishly difficult to ascertain the truth, because the situation (thanks to trial lawyers circling like vultures) favors no meaningful information reaching the public. There is also an enormous incentive for an organization to lie about its progress, for any outfit that forthrightly came out and said it wouldn't make it would be out of business the following week, as its banks and suppliers cut it off. So if you're behind, 'tis better to fudge it and hope against hope that you can make the immovable deadline.
Maybe by September the picture will be clearer. At any rate, I'm going to a official-type Y2K meeting in mid September in a nearby town, and I plan to ask some penetrating questions, so I should have some interesting things to report back to you (unless stocks crash before then, then I probably will write about that).
For the time being, my suggestion would be: Pay attention not to what they say, but what they do. What do we know so far about Y2K? First, the deadlines have slipped. Very few outfits made the original December 31, 1998-with-a-year-for-testing deadline. Most corporations and governmental bodies that have made announcements say they made, or expect to make, deadlines between March 30 and September 30 (or later, in a few cases). Let's face it, a significant minority are running this thing right down to the wire.
Second, we see contingency plans being made in some places. A corporation that stockpiles raw materials obviously does not believe its suppliers' statements that they are compliant, or it expects problems with the transportation systems. And when Washington, DC officials announce plans to have police and emergency personnel on the streets, and "warming centers" open, at rollover time, then you know that they know that the work hasn't (or will not) be done. If Y2K were truly not a problem, then there would be no need for contingency plans.
In the meantime, denigrating the opinions of others is not particularly helpful, though it can be entertaining. Take each person's opinion in turn for the information it contains, within that person's area of expertise and keeping in mind that person's biases. Y2K is not a "belief" system, like a religion; it is a discontinuity in technology. Either the systems will work, or they won't work, or they won't work very well. Your task, as it is mine, is to arrive, as best we can, at the truth of the matter.
I might add that comments from Gary North, Ed Yourdon, Cory Hamasaki and Paul Milne on Ben's observations about them are more than welcome, and will be printed in an upcoming issue, if they wish.
Finally, let me note: I do not worry about my "credibility". I call them as I see them. If I turn out to be wrong,
well then, I'm wrong.
While bubbles that burst are scarcely benign, the consequences need not be catastrophic for the economy. The bursting of the Japanese bubble a decade ago did not lead immediately to sharp contractions in output or a significant rise in unemployment. Arguably, it was the subsequent failure to address the damage to the financial system in a timely manner that caused Japan's current economic problems. Likewise, while the stock market crash of 1929 was destabilizing, most analysts attribute the Great Depression to ensuing failures of policy. And certainly the crash of October 1987 left little lasting imprint on the American economy. - Alan Greenspan [June 17, 1999. Nick's comment: Let's hear it for Alan Greenspan! Apparently, the Fed has at its disposal the means to prevent politicians, bureaucrats and the public from doing the stupid things they did in the U.S. in the 1930s, or in Japan in the 1990s. Forgive me if I harbor a twinge of doubt; but, with this comment, there should be no doubt that the Fed stands ready to (try to) bail out anybody, anytime, if their failure poses a systemic risk.]
Many stock market mutual funds are, in essence, flat dead broke. If they had to liquidate to return investor's
money, they would go under. Their massive derivative positions and borrowing, coupled with the biggest
drop in cash flows in four years, means that liquidation will collapse the stock market and put them under
water. - Nick Guarino
Hitler and Mussolini might have made it to retirement if they had been dealing with the politically-correct leaders of today. - Neal Healy
We have just gone through yet another iatrogenic war, in which our elites have argued falsely that their stated
intentions outweigh any actual consequences. The patient is in far worse shape than before this war began, the
victim of arrogance, incompetence, and mindless machismo. This war was conducted, in no small part, by
people who called themselves, in their private lives, killer litigators. Their specialty was making the other side
lose. So now we have seen what happens when you give a bunch of corporate lawyers their own air force. -
Sam Smith
Whenever I run into someone who might know anything about Y2K, I try to find out what they know. More than one source tells me the FAA isn't done. They aren't 92% done. They aren't going to be done on July 1. They might get done by December 31, but they might not. Make your plans accordingly. - Alan Rushby
To my knowledge, even during the Iranian crisis in 1980 and the war with Iraq, I don't think the entire FBI had been on alert and all annual leave canceled [from December 15 through mid-January 2000].... It's a mess. They're very much behind. If it was a 72-hour 'snowstorm,' you wouldn't bring out 12,000 FBI agents on stand-by and, for the first time maybe in FBI history, cancel everybody's annual leave for a 20-30 day time frame. That's very significant. In my line of work, that's called a clue. - special agent within the Department of Health and Human Services
My conscience is bothering me and I've got to say something.... I have been warned by management that if I go public or say anything negative it's my CAREER. They'll destroy me. I've been in the business for 30 years and I'm too old to change careers. I can't identify myself, but I can speak out. I work for an electrical utility.... If our company is indication, the lights ARE going out next January at the crack of midnight. We don't have time to test every piece of equipment. What we're doing is TYPE CHECKING, which is just a fancy of way of saying SPOT CHECKING. Just the other day I looked at a Phillips VRZ262-Q7 unit that monitors the current in four 05388 subassemblies. I wanted to check everything but my supervisor said, "NO just check one assembly." We ASSUME that the other three will be OK. We're doing the same thing with our Siemens System 3 SCADA; we're only looking at some of the RTUs. They've declared the DPS system to be "non-mission-critical" so we're not even checking it! I'm worried because we've been laying off people right and left to cut costs for the past 5 years.... The company is being run by kids in business suits, and these geniuses think that they'll be able to hire the private contractors to help out in a pinch. BUT THEY'RE GOING TO BE OVERLOADED, TOO. The April 9 drill was a PR stunt.... I don't know what everyone else did but I can TELL you what we did. We talked to each other on walkie-talkies and had a great picnic. One day last winter we advanced the dates on the EMS and the power went off. Cascade failures knocked out a bunch of other stuff. Because of that the geniuses decided that we can't test the entire system, so we just work on "spot remediation." We make sure all the dates LOOK right so that we can claim good numbers in our reports. The first time the whole system will be tested together is January 1 2000! ....Prepare people. Don't let the Happy Faces fool you. You should be ready for a week at least with no power on New Year's with random outages of 4-6 hours for at least another YEAR. Or WORSE. - worried utility worker
Step back, the remediation failed last year. Remember, December 31, 1998 and all of 1999 for testing? March 31, 1999, I'm shaking my fist to show you that I'm pumped. Then it's "Lets run a Y2K Test and show them that everything works!" Well no, Peach Bottom 2 blanks the monitors, City Hall traps the LA mayor, Van Nuys floods the park with 3 million gallons of sewage. June 30, 1999 and everyone, absolutely everyone is ready or my name isn't Albert Gore, uh, John Ko-skin-em, no... whatever... We have 184 Days now [on June 30], and the DC Government has announced plans to drag in locomotive-sized generators to run the water pumps AND in the same report, the hospitals are hoarding, uh, storing up to 90 days of water.... the horn-hairs around here are SCREAMING, "NOBODY PANIC, we're renting locomotive sized generators", we've told the cops they'll be working as armed guards at the food and water stations, uh, let's call them "warming centers".... the DeeCee horn-hairs are trying to get another, what was it, 60 million dollars from the feds; what's this for? Snacks, tidying up a few loose ends.... How did we get into this mess? How did the conventional wisdom pass us so suddenly? ....I never expected a multi-million-gallon sewage spill. And we have 184 days to go. - Cory Hamasaki
As the chairman of the state of Georgia's Y2K task force for the State House, I have studied the possibilities and contingencies closely. I have had many conversations with national leaders such as Congressman Steven Horn, Newt Gingrich, Bob Barr, to name a few. There are facts that the Government doesn't want you to know. John Koskinen, the nation's Y2K czar, has instructed each state to prepare their contingency plans to include 18 cities without power for 3 weeks. The Department of Defense is quite concerned about our power grid on that New Year's Eve. The chances are good that there will be attempts made by outside sources to shut our grid down. This system was never encrypted, nor designed to keep experts out. - George Grindley [State Representative, District 35, Marietta, Georgia]
See the recent revelations (words from on high) that "Monkey-See, Monkey-Do County" (Montgomery County, Maryland) has discovered that, Surprise!!!!, they're having Y2K problems. These problems include early failures caused by date lookaheads.... in their permits systems, financial systems problems, as well as a fun problem in their phone system. Recall that "Monkey-See, Monkey-Do County" brayed on 60 Minutes that they were done, DONE, and the best in the nation by any measure. They demo'ed a part of their testing, Look-look, we rolled the traffic signal computers forward and the cars are not skidding out of control. Now that the best-prepared county in the U.S. has fallen on its face, what about everyone else? What is really going on? What's gone on is that the gasbags who control the budgets have won and everyone else has lost. Oddly enough, Monkey County probably IS ahead of the pack. They've spent tens of millions of dollars, I have a long time pal who has wormed his way into their Y2K work and is billing the bucks, laughing every day, he's got a wheelbarrow for hauling the cash to his Mercedes. It's like Dilbert says, management is nature's way of removing the idiots from the productive stream. The idiots have taken over, decided that there isn't a Y2K problem, and if there is, it can be solved by decisive rhetoric, a firm stance, and by Thor, those programmers aren't going to earn a decent living (a little more than what a plumber or automatic transmission mechanic bills.) Too bad, the idiots won, the work didn't get done..... What would it have taken? What should have been done? Y2K fixes should have been a priority. The programs run by people who know something about computers, risk, the business. Cost should not have been the driver. They should have been told, make it so. Instead the general case was a lackadaisical effort with cost-containment as the priority. A secondary consideration was cronyism, alignment with the party line, political slipperyness. So here we are, 182 days to go [on July 2], the trolls, denialists, and buttheads still churning strong.... The big clue, I'm typing slow so the pollys can keep up, is that the administrators, bureaucrats, risk managers, are far more doomer than the c.s.y2k [Internet newsgroup] doomers are. Not by their words but by their deeds.... The big clue is that they know that things will fail. They know it because the work hasn't been done. - Cory Hamasaki
Most economists believe [the Y2K problem] will be a non-event because they think contingency planning will
cushion the effect and that the problems will be rapidly accessed and fixed. I just don't buy into that. - Ed
Yardeni
Sometimes I get discouraged when I think of the enormous human suffering that will be unleashed when the
bubble finally bursts and we enter the downside. Why, oh why, didn't the officials in whom we have placed
our trust to properly manage the money and banking system, pull the plug on this monstrosity a long time ago,
when the fallout would have been much less severe? Oh well, it's beyond my control; the best I can do is be
prepared and try not to get swept away in the deluge.
COMMENT on "Timer's Trend": We're on a BUY signal generated June 29, yet still on crash watch, with late September into November the next likely time for the crash (attempt). You would have been eaten alive trying to play "Timer's Trend" as it whipsawed for the past six weeks. These whipsaws are most unusual when "stocks" are "making new highs" (as the pundits would have you believe).
______________________________ TIMER'S TREND _________________________________
Mon 23 Nov 98 . | . # | 9374.27 | .+ *
Tue 24 Nov 98 . | #. | 9301.15 | .+ *
Wed 25 Nov 98 . | # | 9314.28 | .+ *
Fri 27 Nov 98 . | .# | 9333.08 | .+ *
Mon 30 Nov 98 .# | . | 9116.55 | + *
Tue 1 Dec 98 . |# . | 9133.54 |+. *
Wed 2 Dec 98 . # . | 9064.54 |+. *
Thu 3 Dec 98 . #I . | 8879.68 + . *<
Fri 4 Dec 98 . | . # | 9016.14 + . *
Mon 7 Dec 98 . | # | 9070.47 |+. *
Tue 8 Dec 98 . |# . | 9027.98 |+. *
Wed 9 Dec 98 . | #. | 9009.19 | + *
Thu 10 Dec 98 .# I . | 8841.58 |+. *
Fri 11 Dec 98 # I . {| 8821.76 + . *
Mon 14 Dec 98 # . I . | 8695.60 | - *
Tue 15 Dec 98 . #I . | 8823.30 | - *
Wed 16 Dec 98 . #I . | 8790.60 | .- *
Thu 17 Dec 98 . I# . | 8875.82 | - *
Fri 18 Dec 98 . I# . | 8903.63 | - *
Mon 21 Dec 98 . I # | 8988.85 + . *
Tue 22 Dec 98 . #I . | 9044.46 + . *
Wed 23 Dec 98 . I .# | 9202.03 |+. *
Thu 24 Dec 98 . I .# | 9217.99 | + *
Mon 28 Dec 98 . I# . | 9226.75 | + *
Tue 29 Dec 98 . | # }| 9320.98 | + *
Wed 30 Dec 98 . | #. | 9274.64 | + *
Thu 31 Dec 98 . | . # | 9181.43 | .+ *
Mon 4 Jan 99 . | # | 9184.27 | .+ *
Tue 5 Jan 99 . | . # | 9311.19 | .+ *
Wed 6 Jan 99 . | . # | 9544.97 |~.~+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Thu 7 Jan 99 . |# . | 9537.76 | . + *
Fri 8 Jan 99 . | .# | 9643.32 | . + *
Mon 11 Jan 99 . # . | 9619.89 | .+ *
Tue 12 Jan 99 .# I . {| 9474.68 | + *
Wed 13 Jan 99 # . I . | 9349.56 |-. *
Thu 14 Jan 99 # . I . | 9120.93 |~-~~*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fri 15 Jan 99 . I . # | 9340.55 | - *
Tue 19 Jan 99 . I #. | 9355.22 |-. *
Wed 20 Jan 99 . I #. | 9335.91 |-. *
Thu 21 Jan 99 .# I . | 9264.08 + . *
Fri 22 Jan 99 # I . | 9120.67 + . *
Mon 25 Jan 99 . & . | 9203.32 |-. *
Tue 26 Jan 99 . & . | 9234.58 |-. *
Wed 27 Jan 99 .# I . | 9200.23 | - *
Thu 28 Jan 99 . & . | 9281.33 |-. *
Fri 29 Jan 99 . I# . | 9358.83 |-. *
Mon 1 Feb 99 . I# . | 9345.70 + . *
Tue 2 Feb 99 # I . | 9274.12 |-. *
Wed 3 Feb 99 . I# . | 9366.81 + . *
Thu 4 Feb 99 # I . | 9304.50 |-. *
Fri 5 Feb 99 # I . | 9304.24 | - *
Mon 8 Feb 99 # I . | 9291.11 | .- *
Tue 9 Feb 99 # . I . | 9133.03 | .- *
Wed 10 Feb 99 # I . | 9177.31 | . - *
Thu 11 Fab 99 .# I . | 9363.46 | . - *
Fri 12 Feb 99 # . I . | 9274.89 | . - *
Tue 16 Feb 99 .# I . | 9297.03 | . - *
Wed 17 Feb 99 # . I . | 9195.47 | . - *
Thu 18 Feb 99 .# I . | 9298.63 | . - *
Fri 19 Feb 99 .# I . | 9339.95 | . - *
Mon 22 Feb 99 . I #. | 9552.68 | - *
Tue 23 Feb 99 .# I . | 9544.42 | - *
Wed 24 Feb 99 # I . | 9399.67 | - *
Thu 25 Feb 99 # . I . | 9366.34 | .- *
Fri 26 Feb 99 #. I . | 9306.58 | .- *
Mon 1 Mar 99 #. I . | 9324.78 | . - *
Tue 2 Mar 99 # I . | 9297.61 | . - *
Wed 3 Mar 99 # I . | 9275.88 | . - *
Thu 4 Mar 99 . & . | 9467.40 | .- *
Fri 5 Mar 99 . I . # | 9736.08 |-.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Mon 8 Mar 99 . I #. | 9727.61 + . *
Tue 9 Mar 99 . #I . | 9693.76 + . *
Wed 10 Mar 99 . I# . | 9772.84 |+. *
Thu 11 Mar 99 . |# . | 9897.44 |+. *
Fri 12 Mar 99 . #I . | 9876.35 + . *
Mon 15 Mar 99 . & . | 9958.77 + . *
Tue 16 Mar 99 . #I . | 9930.47 + . *
Wed 17 Mar 99 .# I . | 9879.41 |-. *
Thu 18 Mar 99 . I# . | 9997.62 |-. *
Fri 19 Mar 99 # I . | 9903.55 |-. *
Mon 22 Mar 99 # I . | 9890.51 | - *
Tue 23 Mar 99 # . I . | 9671.83 | .- *
Wed 24 Mar 99 # I . | 9666.84 | . - *
Thu 25 Mar 99 . & . | 9836.39 | . - *
Fri 26 Mar 99 # I . | 9822.24 | . - *
Mon 29 Mar 99 . I# . |10006.78 | .- *
Tue 30 Mar 99 #. I . | 9913.26 | - *
Wed 31 Mar 99 #. I . | 9786.16 | - *
Thu 1 Apr 99 .# I . | 9832.51 | .- *
Mon 5 Apr 99 . I #. |10007.33 | - *
Tue 6 Apr 99 . #I . | 9963.49 | - *
Wed 7 Apr 99 . #I . |10085.31 | - *
Thu 8 Apr 99 . I# . |10197.70 |-. *
Fri 9 Apr 99 . I #. |10173.84 + . *
Mon 12 Apr 99 . | #. |10339.51 +~.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Tue 13 Apr 99 . |# . |10395.01 |+. *
Wed 14 Apr 99 . | #. |10411.66 |+. *
Thu 15 Apr 99 . |# . |10462.72 |+. *
Fri 16 Apr 99 . | # }|10493.89 |+. *
Mon 19 Apr 99 . | # |10440.53 | + *
Tue 20 Apr 99 . |# . |10448.55 | + *
Wed 21 Apr 99 . | .# |10581.42 | + *
Thu 22 Apr 99 . | .# |10727.18 | .+ *
Fri 23 Apr 99 . | # |10689.67 | .+ *
Mon 26 Apr 99 . | .# |10718.59 | .+ *
Tue 27 Apr 99 . | # |10831.71 | .+ *
Wed 28 Apr 99 . | # |10845.45 | + *
Thu 29 Apr 99 . | # |10878.38 |~+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Fri 30 Apr 99 . | #. |10789.04 | + *
Mon 3 May 99 . | . # |11014.69 | .+ *
Tue 4 May 99 . | # |10886.11 | .+ *
Wed 5 May 99 . | .# |10955.41 | .+ *
Thu 6 May 99 . | #. |10946.82 | .+ *
Fri 7 May 99 . | .# |11031.59 | .+ *
Mon 10 May 99 . | .# |11007.25 | .+ *
Tue 11 May 99 . | . # |11026.15 | .+ *
Wed 12 May 99 . | # |11000.37 | .+ *
Thu 13 May 99 . | .# |11107.19 | . + *
Fri 14 May 99 # . | . |10913.32 | + *
Mon 17 May 99 # I . |10853.47 + . *
Tue 18 May 99 . #I . |10836.95 |-. *
Wed 19 May 99 . & . |10887.39 | - *
Thu 20 May 99 . | #. |10866.74 | - *
Fri 21 May 99 . |# . |10829.28 |-. *
Mon 24 May 99 .# I . |10654.67 + . *
Tue 25 May 99 # . I . {|10531.09 |-. *
Wed 26 May 99 . & . |10702.16 |-. *
Thu 27 May 99 .# I . |10466.93 |~-~~*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fri 28 May 99 . I# . |10559.74 | - *
Tue 1 Jun 99 . & . |10596.26 |-. *
Wed 2 Jun 99 .# I . |10577.89 |-. *
Thu 3 Jun 99 . I# . |10663.69 |-. *
Fri 4 Jun 99 . | # }|10799.84 |+. *
Mon 7 Jun 99 . | #. |10909.38 + . *
Tue 8 Jun 99 . & . |10765.64 + . *
Wed 9 Jun 99 . #I . |10690.29 |+. *
Thu 10 Jun 99 #. I . {|10621.27 + . *
Fri 11 Jun 99 # I . |10490.51 | - *
Mon 14 Jun 99 # I . |10563.33 | .- *
Tue 15 Jun 99 . #I . |10594.99 | .- *
Wed 16 Jun 99 . I # |10784.95 | - *
Thu 17 Jun 99 . | #. }|10841.63 |-. *
Fri 18 Jun 99 . | # |10855.56 + . *
Mon 21 Jun 99 . | #. |10815.98 |+. *
Tue 22 Jun 99 . # . |10721.63 | +
Wed 23 Jun 99 . #I . {|10666.86 |+. *
Thu 24 Jun 99 # I . |10534.83 + . *
Fri 25 Jun 99 # I . |10552.56 |-. *
Mon 28 Jun 99 . & . |10655.15 | - *
Tue 29 Jun 99 . | # }|10815.35 |-. *
Wed 30 Jun 99 . | .# |10970.80 + . *>
Thu 1 Jul 99 . | .# |11066.42 |+. *
Thu 1 Jul 99 . | .# |11066.42 |+.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
Fri 2 Jul 99 . | .# |11139.24 | .+ *
Tue 6 Jul 99 . | # |11104.10 | .+ *
Wed 7 Jul 99 . |# . |11187.36 | .+ *
Thu 8 Jul 99 . |# . |11126.89 | + *
Fri 9 Jul 99 . | # |11193.70 | + *
Mon 12 Jul 99 . |# . |11200.98 |+. *
Tue 13 Jul 99 . # . |11175.02 |+. *
Wed 14 Jul 99 . |# . |11148.10 |+. *
Thu 15 Jul 99 . | # |11186.41 |+. *
========================================================================
"Timer's Trend" is based on 4% and 10% exponential moving averages of the New York Stock Exchange advance/decline line (that is, the ratio of advancing to declining stocks). There are many symbols shown above, but the ones that count are the braces: {, } = "Timer's Trend" (4% exponential confirmed by 10% exponential) SELL ({) or BUY(}) signal.
As usual, there is no August issue. NEXT ISSUE - will appear about September 30.
/Nick Chase