#BEML quarterly chart (22 years)
- Stock has formed a massive 16 yr ascending triangle
- FIIs have increased stake from 1.3% to 6% in the last 1 yr
- Excellent relative strength in the last few weeks
- Daily close above 1900 can trigger a good rally
- Stop at 1740
#stockideas

More from Trendline Investor
#ANGELONE being the strongest among the #broking stocks has taken off!
Which one would be the next?
#StocksToBuy https://t.co/zaAfCtOkJ6
Which one would be the next?
#StocksToBuy https://t.co/zaAfCtOkJ6

I think it is just about time for #broking stocks to \U0001f680!
— Trendline Investor (@dmdsplyinvestor) April 4, 2022
- #AngelOne looks the strongest & near ATH
- #Isec near major trendline support, forming Dojis on weekly
- #Motilalofs near major trendline supports, forming Dojis on monthly
All three low-risk setups!#stockideas pic.twitter.com/xB3Tm9jSou
#Nifty watch this trendline to be taken out for a good long trade! https://t.co/nC32qh2rOO

#Nifty perfect reversal after filling the gap and testing the middle of the channel.
— Trendline Investor (@dmdsplyinvestor) June 28, 2022
Waiting for Nifty to take out that major horizontal resistance and then we can see a good short term rally. https://t.co/m3hwcWno9q pic.twitter.com/WhhLPc9JaC
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x