(Complimentary excerpt from Thursday's Daily Briefing, posted on www.ingerletter.com late Wednesday. As of midday Thursday Gene's S&P 900.933.GENE hotline continues long; essentially seamlessly from the 1460 level on Tuesday's turnaround, when shorts were successfully reversed. For now looking to higher prices in a necessarily flexible approach that continues willing to respond to the market's advance messages, as we did in late February for a bullish direction, and then warning in late March of renewed volatility in April/May.)

Gene Inger’s Daily Briefing. . . . for Thursday, April 6, 2000:

Good evening;

Remember the Plunge Protection Team? That was a rumored Washington "financial rescue" working group, about which everyone has been very secretive since the first musing about such a structure for potential intervention were first surfaced by the Washington Post back in 1997. A degree of speculation has again appeared regarding curiosity as to whether that's how the stock market managed its fantastic recovery on Tuesday. No complaints here; we were calling for the comeback anyway, and caught the vast majority on the way down and then the ride back up. But we are a bit concerned about the magnitude of current or future "testing", not because others are but because there are stories around suggesting that participants in the cloistered group are said to have been among those helping trigger yesterday's massive S&P futures buy programs. (That doesn't mean the market can't work through this; as clearly it's the initiation of a move that is key, as most players will prefer the upside when the prevailing directional stability is restored.)

(reserved section)

What does concern us, if that happened (with Goldman Sachs and Merrill Lynch the rumored big players in the "save"), is why the next day you have the Chairman of the Federal Reserve almost directly contradicting the intended results of a "plunge protection" intervention, by his remarks at today's White House Economic Conference. For ages there has been a connection between the ebb & flow of interest rates and the market's direction, although usually monetary policy and the money supply expansion or contraction are in harmony with the direction of interest rates. Not so in this year's environment as you know; and we suspect the Fed Chairman was thinking just that when he made the remarks expressing a disconnect between rates and stock market direction.

Nevertheless, to say so publicly is almost a challenge to the market's stabilization efforts, and of course that would be more curious if there was what amounts to a clandestine intervention in the reversal of Tuesday (again; we agreed with the turn, and were looking for a comeback, so that's just fine, but we do like contemplating what underlies the action, and where it may lead to next). We're not critical of calculated buying at certain points (as a matter of fact we pretty much nailed it in the NASDAQ with our advance goal of 3700-3800 as a downside target for support, wash it out slightly and then turn up before any further testing, and a week ago we indicated that a break in the June S&P would have to take out 1460 to find meaningful support and buying interest); but we are curious about the quality level of buyers in the past couple days, basically concerned as to whether a rebound merely buys time, or reflects genuine buying. (We have a view on this.)

At this point the remarks of last night still prevail, regarding seasonal difficulties, and even what's likely a diminished amount of sidelined cash available to come into the buy side of equities. For a glance beyond that, we have to consider whether or not the primary focus should be availability of ready money for commitment, or whether stock prices (in the various sectors) justify additional commitments; not simply whether the money is there to come into the buy side of the ledger. The market, based on intermediate and major trend indicators had simply turned down from very high levels, and doing so in a staggered way with regard to the NYSE, which is hampered in parabolic moves by the nature of the restrictive "trading collars" implemented after the 1987 Crash, and as a matter of fact revised just last year. The NASDAQ market did make it into an oversold situation as of yesterday (by virtue of dropping pretty much in an unencumbered straight-line) and is trying to reassert stability at this time). There is a majority of discussion among "market timers" trying to imply that the NASDAQ must go to lower lows after a failing rebound. That's not necessarily what must take place, although if it does there would almost of necessity be a longer rebuilding time in the markets than many expect. Such a further purging would expunge too many short-term types (in the so-called dot.com stocks) who might have been extremely leveraged, or otherwise unable or unwilling to fight for a comeback.

Not to mention that the history of such breaks often sees the wildest comeback efforts, but then if the bearish trend is going to extend, a slow erosion sets-in, that inevitably takes a protracted toll. Given that last years lows had so many characteristics of a climactic washout in the NASDAQ market (more so than in the Nasdaq 100 (NDX), which is of course populated more by big-cap technology stocks), we are more inclined to view what took place as an intermediate (and totally warranted) retracement, of the type we had to expect in the big tech stocks (and did), as well as a continuation of the downtrends in the first-generation internet commerce and e-tailing stocks, as forewarned not only since last year, but felt to have commenced then, not any time recently.

For the smaller-cap new techs, the climate of fear brought them under pressure (many already in fact have rebounded smartly off yesterday's lows); and for those that have potentially real service ideas or products forthcoming (such as "new media" and "new optical"), our view that yesterday afforded new investors an opportunity to nibble at such stocks isn't changed; that doesn't mean of course that they don't go through a period of further testing; doesn't mean that the action isn't dicey for awhile, and doesn't mean all will do well or be survivors in the fullness of time. Some will of course, and as we often have we'll continue to distinguish those with better products and odds of not merely survival but prosperity, as can be best assessed. For the moment, while there has been a multi-month overall decline in (examples and comments on future action is reserved), we thought the selling was emotionally reflective of a type of player (as previously warned) that had come into such stocks along with others after it had already tripled or more, and that to us set up a high-cost group of shareholders that ideally would be at risk (boy were they). Typically the high-cost buyers get washed-out severely, before stocks prepare for new upward trends. That the stocks rebounded as rapidly as they did seems to reveal, in our opinion, an underlying interest by somebody in accumulating shares cheaply when available; from our vantagepoint. 

Last week and last night we talked about liquidity again; assessing concerns that leverage in the form of margin debt would play a factor in the forecast swoons during the April/May timeframe in the wake of the beautiful upside we enjoyed for the S&P in the previous month. We pointed out the Tuesday selling in NYSE big-cap stocks likely accelerated to meet margin calls deriving from NASDAQ pressures (portions of diversified portfolios), and the idea that such pressure would be a diminishing force in Wednesday's action. Thursday could be a little dicey given the soft finish on Wednesday for the Senior Averages; however the late selling was more than likely primarily a function of the inability of the June S&P to surmount the earlier highs, and intraday squaring. For sure this is normally routine, except that just now few are willing to be heroic traders overnight.

Daily action; Technicals; Bits & Bytes; & Economic News: (all are normally reserved areas)

We expected as much, and do not see anything particularly earth-shattering in Wednesday's key events that requires special assessment, other than observing that Fed Chairman Greenspan's comments were superficially at odds with the mantra of Government views, but were not unusual if you accept the postulation we ourselves have made for some time that it is the availability of money, not the cost to rent it (interest rates) that actually determines most noteworthy enduring economic impacts. He did not put it that way; but we often have, and suspect that is essentially what he meant when he said rates don't affect a market like this. He also may simply have been thinking about the indirect ability of hedge funds and other major leveraged players to borrow outside of margin controls (which the Fed would be loathe to touch right now we suspect), which means they to are concerned about the availability of monies and the ability to "turn" it, not the cost to simply rent it, or telling the market not to worry about another forthcoming Fed funds hike.

A couple Congressmen made overtures (they always do after a market spills; hardly ever before) about revisiting margin regulations; well, they need to look at other regulations that relate to the hypothecation of funds and borrowing for the purpose of investment speculation, by hedgers, not by normal individual investors, who are unfairly being painted together within such broad brush implications by politicians who probably don't even know the proportions and degree of leverage that are out there for certain players (with even less, if any, impact on offshore players we'll add).  

Having forecast problems for April, we indicated last night that we're not overconfident about a sustained market recovery, or complacently chipper about not having an eventual test of these lows yesterday (or worse), more so in the S&P than in the NASDAQ interestingly (though both in theory could do it). Outside of a seasonal and immense psychological trauma (that the market broke, combined also with an absence of large cash-flows this time of year) experienced by the market, and the very high level that it still is trading at in the key Senior Averages of course; just looking at the action did and does give the market the opportunity to successfully test the lows, and maybe successfully, by conventional technical interpretation. To deny that we'd need to put in a rally that takes out today's highs in the S&P, and eventually the key 1540 inflection area. (A timeframe for this has been provided, so ideally the market will work on extending the rally now.)

We noted, that in this volatile world, we prefer not to see a full-fledged test of the lows. That's as  a full-blown test might be dicey, because of the huge leverage, plus a knowledge that real turns don't usually let players in as cheaply as they would "wish", if the move up is going to be for real. This is April, not October or February, so that makes a big difference. It means "the boys" are not quite in the type of control dominance they'd like to be, that accidents can occur, that there are at least moderately greater risks of losing that control, which was exhibited before all of this market notoriety, by virtue of muti-sector rotated upside that had to pull back, but which of course many would have preferred hold the higher levels. That was not possible because NASDAQ had to fail; although the Nasdaq 100 (NDX) only broke it's uptrend structure in the final phase of downside (a normal behavior for leading big-cap stocks in a market, which they surely are). The NDX today surrendered a very nice recovery to finish about 100 off the best levels of the session; mostly in late selling, which tends to suggest an effort to decline the market again on Thursday, but we do not think the downside will hold for now.

In summary . . . it remains a very tough time of year to get meaningful new cash into the market, and the market does not like environments where "cash flow", timing of any retirement needs or potential liquidity are seen as paramount considerations, which the market (in it's infinite wisdom) actually doesn't know or care about (though it can reflect mass movements of course). What we disdain is the automatic assumption by so many that because they're "in it for the long term" that somehow diminishes risk across a broad front, which we've never felt valid, especially in volatile and speculative sectors of the market. The markets always like technology, in every era of this Country's history; but not the same technology for any protracted period. Don't forget; in their old heyday the Utilities were the hottest (internet type) stocks of the time; when electricity was not a commodity, but a cherished and relished service, until it eventually became totally ubiquitous.

The internet (the survivors) will itself become a modern utility service (already is for most of us) as it is taken for granted and treated accordingly. But we are not past the strong growth era for the entire sector, just the old e-players we've argued for ages should have shown profits before even this year developed; and where they do, presumably greater profits to warrant the prices certain stocks got to, which clearly we always thought needed to have some correlation to their growth in gross; not growth in share price. That is why we referred last month to insurmountable highs in some of them, and the brewing risk for the month of April, which became incredibly right in the middle of everyone's eyesights days after the negative divergences of strong market rallies without any positive breadth or favorable internal indicators, even before the 1^st Quarter ended. It is also our view that following the catharsis, the last think many will expect is all-time highs, one of the reasons they might consider that within the realm of possibility, strange as it may seem. 

It remains our view that (barring a cataclysm in the next few weeks) this will still be the overdue corrective action setting the stage for an advance into the latter part of the year. With the Tiger funds selling out of the way; with margin liquidation eviscerating any who didn't heed our caution specifically in that regard last month; with the bell already rung (but not definitively stilled as yet) for the buy-the-dips forever crowd of speculators; and with the non-profitable (nor particularly very promising) old e-commerce and portal stocks from last year continuing their swoon forecast almost a year ago, while the new tech stocks simply retrench emotionally, but not unexpectedly, we are reasonably optimistic that the process expected (not by degree, but by direction) for this April and May will move to the expected conclusion and/or tests as the markets shall require. 

(forward outlook commentary reserved)

The McClellan Oscillator is bouncing modestly at +69; that's not crucial now as the market did drop and turn; which actually is detectable only by virtue of a tightening of the summation's dots.  After potentially excellent gains (for those willing to do it) Tuesday in the realm potentially around 8000 points, and with around 4500 realized Wednesday on the long side, we are flat overnight. As of 8:45 p.m. ET, S&P premium on Globex was 1513, with futures around the 1502 level now. (Again long on the first dip Thursday, with the 900.933.GENE hotline long at the time of posting.)

Tuesday's panic into blue-chips, and out of tech did not end, but was interrupted by the swoon on NASDAQ which likely compelled serious selling on the NYSE to meet margin calls yesterday. Our admonition to avoid leverage was reasserted in late March, and again validated in spades most recently. A reversal of another big decline again was a likely prospect Tuesday, although it was more pronounced than anything we've seen in modern times, with the exception of the LTCM debacle, which turned equally fast, but even that was not so frenetic. Then as now we are open-minded and continue to catch moves; but this time the weekly preceding declines did not establish an oversold condition generally, which made the first recovery somewhat suspect. The jury is still out on whether the market can and will hold higher support; we desire it do just that.

Have a good evening;

Gene Inger,

Publisher

~The Inger Letter™ (on www.ingerletter.com)

~Gene Inger’s Daily Briefing™ (The Inger Letter’s Daily on ingerletter.com & other sites)

~Gene Inger’s Intraday Hotline™

(900) 933-GENE

(AT&T $2. first min; $.95 additional)

Updates are at the opening bell, 10 a.m. EDT, noon, 3 p.m., and the final is online at 7:30 p.m.

Range of Inger & Co. service details (current as of January 1, 2000):

The Inger Letter™ . . . . . . is available on an annual basis at our site; American Express, Visa, MasterCard are accepted. A Secure Commerce Server is used by our ISP host; where subscriptions can be ordered onsite. Subscriptions can also be ordered by fax, or through our office by telephone or by mail. The Letter is only available via the Internet. Gene’s occasionally quoted in Barron’s, The Wall Street Journal, Investor’s Business Daily, various Internet financial sites, CNNfn, and is an original periodic CNBC market maven. 

Subscriptions may be received via our private web site: ingerletter.com  at $ 190. annually (published every month; interim's only if needed). Investors focused on the short-term should subscribe to Gene Inger’s Daily Briefing separately or in addition to the Inger Letter. S&P trading ideas mostly originate on the hotline.

Gene Inger’s Daily Briefing™ .... normally posted nightly by 9 pm on www.ingerletter.com plus co-brand sites. Charges do not vary between sites; consult yours for details. The uniqueness of ingerletter.com includes ease of use, bonus charts, news, corporate reports and mutual fund comparison access. A brief capsule comment posted nightly on the web site is intended to be a summary of market condition, with all forecasts reserved for subscribers. A closing S&P or Dow chart is posted nightly.

Gene Inger’s Hotline™ (900 933-GENE) is primarily intended for short-term traders in the S&P and T-Bond contracts, and for investors concerned about market conditions at a given point or price level. Assessment of ongoing overall action & next day’s call is provided. The hotline remains the primary short-term trading service offered. The hotline is updated on opening bell; at 10 a.m. EST, noon, 3 p.m. & a nightly final at 7:30 p.m. Typically, comments are available 5 min. past stated times, and are occasionally more frequent during volatile market swings. When interim comments are intended, they are preannounced on the preceding call.

(900 933-GENE)

(AT&T charge $2. first min. & $.95 for add. min’s. Calls can be dialed only in the USA; overseas note below.)

Canadian & overseas investors plus those calling from blocked phones in the U.S. , can access the hotline via an available annual flat-rate. Call Laura in our office for details. Flat-rate is $1500. plus applicable long-distance and is non-discountable nor refundable; so we urge stockbrokers & other blocked traders unable to access from their office to pre-sample the 900 line via a phone that is not blocked before determining they want the  flat-rate service. Many brokers do prefer this service, as it can be thus accessed through their firms WATS lines, thus eliminating certain long distance costs. If you are an international investor/trader; please feel free to contact Laura or Alan in our office (Pacific Time, US) via email or telephone. Orders for the flat-rate hotline may now be charged to the major credit cards via Alan in our California office only, and not via the web site. Checks in U.S. funds or from foreign bank U.S. correspondents are acceptable as well.

Requisite disclaimer: Trading in securities, of any type, may not be suitable for all individuals. Futures and options trading can entail a greater risk, and greater volatility, than trading equities. All trading is at the sole responsibility, discretion and risk of any investor. Our discussions, or trades in stocks & futures, are structural for purpose of giving shape and flow to our work. Suggestions should only be considered as guidelines or input to assist your own good judgement, or that of your financial advisor. Market and economic forecasts in our work are intended to be just guidelines of a general nature (as we view markets), and should not be taken as a recommendation to buy or sell the referenced security, debt instrument, option or futures contract. To actually consider doing so, we advise you consult your broker or other professional to determine your suitability. No commentary in our services is to be considered an offer to buy or to sell securities, or related derivatives. Further, while we certainly may own securities discussed in our commentary, it is our policy not to buy or sell a stock or any position similarly discussed in our Services (with respect to an action idea), prior to providing reasonable opportunity for subscribers to do so first (typically two or three trading days after we publish any selection; unless otherwise noted). 

Also, our policy is to decline discussing with anyone what stocks may or may not be purchased, sold or shorted in future issues. In addition, most of our equity strategies are short-to-intermediate in nature, with core holdings intended for the long-term.  Most picks are of listed NYSE or Nasdaq stocks that trade with reasonable liquidity. There is no effort to focus on “thin” or low-volume stocks, nor is there a day-trading focus on individual issues in our Services. Occasionally (usually technology) we will find a small-cap stock, but that is not our primary thrust. Also, many traders who prefer equities to trading the S&P on our hotline, will find similar moves among a handful of “favorite” major tech stocks, than often can be treated as surrogates for the S&P, as can the “mini” S&P and Dow contracts, from time to time, or related securities available on the major Exchanges, such as the recently premiered QQQ listing. There is never a direct or indirect sales or marketing relationship between our firm and any brokerage firm, hedge fund or mutual fund, or advisory firm. Right or wrong; our thinking is totally independent. We should be considered an independent resource; to supplement your own work.

E.E. Inger & Co., Inc., and its officers and staff, shall not be liable for any decision made, or action taken by you or others, based upon reliance on news, information, or any material published by our internet and/or telephony resource services. All information provided is to be used, considered or evaluated by investors/readers, on an “as is, with all faults” basis, though we believe sources as reliable.

Finally, as we respect subscribers privacy (as we do our own), readers names and email addresses are never rented or made available to any outside service for any purpose whatsoever. We have never rented our mailing lists in the 29 years since first starting the Letter. 

Office address:

E.E. Inger & Co., Inc. (The Inger Letter)

100 East Thousand Oaks Blvd.,

Suite 227,

Thousand Oaks, CA 91360

~ Telephone 805.496.6441 ~

E-mail contacts:

All site tech support or password activation questions:

service@ingerletter.com

Alan or Laura Raphael for hotline or office questions; telephone, or email:

office@ingerletter.com

Mr. Inger (only if needed; and not for site tech support please) directly:

gene@ingerletter.com

© 2000 E.E. Inger & Co., Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any form without permission prohibited; while brief excerpted quotations are allowed, providing a link or reference to our web site is included.

In the mainstream:

1. the majority of market timers embrace flashy "buy or sell signal" approaches, which (while occasionally right) have little real meaning to portfolios, as most investors are rarely completely committed on the long side, fully short, or completely out;
2. virtually all mutual fund managers remain constantly fully invested, inappropriately presuming investors -by buying their funds- want every nickel in stocks or bonds. (If you surveyed fund holders, the irony is that most actually expect professional managers to increase cash proportions at times of risk, not remain at the brink, in order to have heavy cash on hand to buy during severe a breakdown. Most adjust cash reserves merely based on redemption projections rather than market conditions.);
3. brokerage strategists are sometimes swayed by investment banking or market-maker relationships with the very stocks they are analyzing. Faith is required to presume complete integrity in recommended stocks, and to believe the (always) bullish Treasury opinions are warranted, it just might be of interest to know which houses are trading Bonds themselves, thus possibly "talking their position".

Services offered by E.E. Inger & Co., Inc., Publisher of "The Inger Letter":

• The Inger Letter . . . $ 190. annually (24 issue minimum; normally published every 2 weeks) usually a 4-page non-glitzy Letter directly projecting market trends with a focus on technology (International & Canadian subscribers, please add $20. for additional postage). Gene Inger is the sole Editor & Publisher of the Letter; all publishing is done in-house, and not contracted to outside sources. Respecting privacy, we never rent or release subscriber names. We encourage readers to receive the Letter electronically (colorized graphs & instant dispatch). Delivery of The Letter by e-mail or PIN code access via CompuServe or the Internet will not carry a surcharge, nor will rates be lower. Online subscribers will however, be provided occasional alerts or reports during extreme market conditions without charge. (International subscribers electing electronic delivery may omit the postage surcharge. Pro-rata refunds of full-price subscriptions are available, subject to a $25. additional service charge. Vacation & travel extensions are easily arranged; call Laura from 9-5 PDT at (805) 496-6441.)
• The Inger Letter Online. . .nightly analysis and projection of the next day’s market. Details may be found in The Inger Letter or announced on this page, as final plans are formalized. (The Letter & hotline are consistent services for years, while Internet & Online plans by virtually everyone are still seeking final forms. We’re planning a fairly comprehensive service, complete with portfolio summary & twelve-month trailing performance tracking. The trailing report will be available for everyone, whether they subscribe to the daily edition or not. Also, of course, note that past performance does not assure future results, and that traders decisions are their own.
• The Inger Letter HOTLINE. . .analysis at 10 am, noon, 3 pm + next day’s forecast at 7:30 pm.
  (AT&T charges $2. for the first minute; $ .95 each additional). The number: (900) 933-GENE
  Flat-rate direct-dial service is available for blocked & International callers at a yearly charge of $ 1200., plus any Long Distance charges which may apply. For details: Laura at (805) 496-6441.
  (Trial phone service thoroughly on our "900" access first; as pro-rata refunds are not available.)

Finally, quotation from our web & online pages is permitted, but only with full accreditation.
The Inger Letter
published by E. E. Inger & Co., Inc.

E-Mail Gene Inger (and tell him you saw him at The Money Mentor)