With digital content available identifying #Stocks breaking resistance is not a big task but exiting these trades timely if they go against us is the most imp. thing.
2/n
An educational #Thread on how 1 can identify "Freakout"(Fake Breakout) explained with practical e.g's so that every1 can understand.
Identifying Breakout is not a big challenge but exiting it at the right time if it "fails" with minor loss is imp. which 90% people don't do.
1/n
With digital content available identifying #Stocks breaking resistance is not a big task but exiting these trades timely if they go against us is the most imp. thing.
2/n
Now if some1 bought on breakout then usually most will hold it till now or exit at cmp in distress.
3/n
* Stock makes a LowerLow, LowerHigh consecutively for 2 days.
* It breaks the low of breakout candle & sustains for 1 day.
USDINR made a LL,LH for 2 days on 17th,20th Dec so exit was at 75.73 on 20th.
4/n
Ideal exit was on 29th Nov at 739 when it broke the breakout candle low of 733 & sustained below it on 29th. So it fulfilled 2nd criteria of exit.
5/n
Hence it met the 2nd criteria of sustaining abv Breakdown high & immediately 1 should have exited shorts, built longs.
6/n
More from Screeners
Such opportunities only come once in a few years.
Step-by-step: how to use (the free) @screener_in to generate investment ideas.
Do retweet if you find it useful to benefit max investors. 🙏🙏
Ready or not, 🧵🧵⤵️
I will use the free screener version so that everyone can follow along.
Outline
1. Stepwise Guide
2. Practical Example: CoffeeCan Companies
3. Practical Example: Smallcap Consistent compounders
4. Practical Example: Smallcap turnaround
5. Key Takeaway
1. Stepwise Guide
Step1
Go to https://t.co/jtOL2Bpoys
Step2
Go to "SCREENS" tab
Step3
Go to "CREATE NEW SCREEN"
At this point you need to register. No charges. I did that with my brother's email id. This is what you see after that.
Step-by-step: how to use (the free) @screener_in to generate investment ideas.
Do retweet if you find it useful to benefit max investors. 🙏🙏
Ready or not, 🧵🧵⤵️
I will use the free screener version so that everyone can follow along.
Outline
1. Stepwise Guide
2. Practical Example: CoffeeCan Companies
3. Practical Example: Smallcap Consistent compounders
4. Practical Example: Smallcap turnaround
5. Key Takeaway
1. Stepwise Guide
Step1
Go to https://t.co/jtOL2Bpoys
Step2
Go to "SCREENS" tab
Step3
Go to "CREATE NEW SCREEN"
At this point you need to register. No charges. I did that with my brother's email id. This is what you see after that.
You May Also Like
The entire discussion around Facebook’s disclosures of what happened in 2016 is very frustrating. No exec stopped any investigations, but there were a lot of heated discussions about what to publish and when.
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
The story doesn\u2019t say you were told not to... it says you did so without approval and they tried to obfuscate what you found. Is that true?
— Sarah Frier (@sarahfrier) November 15, 2018
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
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
