Saturday, February 27, 2010
Here I am puzzled: this was bought as a 1st day break-out, but it was pretty clear to be a break-out from the very beginning of the day, so why wait until $13.96 to buy? Tim sold APKT with a loss at $13.58 later in the day.
The stock was sold short as a pump&dump, and you would not be able to tell that from this chart -- need a finer scale data. What is remarkable here is the fact that Tim sold the stock short on the day of a huge break-out. Certainly if there is a technical side to this trade, it does not lie on the day scale. A profitable trade for Tim, he sold short at $4.30, covered at $4.19, according to the log kept on his site.
Japanese candlestick pattern known as handing man started this very strong downward trend which lasted for six consecutive days, coming to climax on January 26 -- a belt-hold line day which, despite a downward gap at the opening and an increased volume, failed to accelerate the price decay. Tim went short on the fourth day of this powerful trend. According to the log on his site, he sold at $1.28, covered at $1.10.
Investment themes making magazine covers often indicate points when everyone and their grandmother "bought into" the theme, so the trend can not develop any further. Will "Betrüger in der Euro-Familie" headline in Focus magazine confirm the rule?
This trade must have been a frustrating experience: the stock showed a strong performance the day before; most likely Tim bought near the beginning of the day (the buy price, $4.55 is very close to the price at open, $4.54). The stock went as high as $4.90, but Tim never took profit and eventually sold at $4.27.
The stock must have been sold short on the previous day, Jan 21, the day with the downside gap at the opening. Covered at or near the previous day's low, although the stock kept moving lower. Speaking of volume, both days look unremarkable. Data from Tim's log at his site: sold at $3.50, covered at $3.28.
Friday, February 12, 2010
According to Tim's log entry on his site, the stock was sold (short) at $7.53, covered at $7.33. According to Tim's comments, $7.50 was an important level technically. The $7.33 price does not seem to belong to January 22 though; it's possible that he covered next day or that he covered on January 22 and next day, with average price being $7.33. It's interesting that speaking of volume, there is nothing special about January 22.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Tim keeps shorting CDII based on fundamental conviction, and this time possibly adding the fact that the previous day was a relatively strong downward move coupled with an up-tick in volume. This is the second CDII trade I record (here is the first one). He sold short at $2.14, covered at $2.16.