Jubilant Food
The major sell-off on huge volumes couldn't take it below Mar 7th low. The sell-off to my best analysis is capitulation wherein even the last bull has sold. I don't see any further selling pressure.
The risk is till March 7th low. The gap will act as a minor Res.
More from The_Chartist 📈
CDSL - Learning.... ✅✅
I believe 5-10 stocks are enough for a retail investor to achieve super performance. And with small capital, there is no point in buying 20/30 names which doesn't even get appropriate initial capital.
I believe 5-10 stocks are enough for a retail investor to achieve super performance. And with small capital, there is no point in buying 20/30 names which doesn't even get appropriate initial capital.
Stock: CDSL
— Steve Nison (@nison_steve) December 16, 2020
CMP - 516.95. Low risk setup. Weak below 500. Target open. Stock retesting the ascending triangle BO line. Kindly check please. @nishkumar1977 @Rishikesh_ADX @VijayThk @kuttrapali @Thekalal @PAVLeader pic.twitter.com/PlcpOMsdnz
These high-volume selloff candles right before any -ve news always intrigue me. the same thing happened with Infosys before the whistleblower complaint was out & the stock gapped down. TV 18 & VTL were other examples.
Fresh case - RUPA https://t.co/nqq5nI1wLU
Fresh case - RUPA https://t.co/nqq5nI1wLU
Respect your stop losses in the stocks that have gone down today with heavy volumes even on a strong day.
— The_Chartist \U0001f4c8 (@charts_zone) March 17, 2022
VTL pic.twitter.com/3pJ9XngCDL
More from Jublfood
You May Also Like
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?